Re: thumbs.el and transparency

[Mathias Dahl]

Juri Linkov <address@hidden> writes:

> Since there are two thumbnail packages in Emacs, it would be double
> effort to contribute to both.  What do you think about idea to move
> the basic things (like creation of thumbnail files to the same directory)
> to thumbs.el, and leaving in tumme.el only advanced functionality?

I don't understand the reasoning behind this, or I have a completely
different view point. You say it is hard to contribute to two
thumbnail packages, to which I agree with completely. But you suggest
moving things from tumme to thumbs to make them more different. Still
some things would need to exist in both. Wouldn't the best solution be
to have *one* thumbnail package that handle both basic and advanced
things? In my opinion, tumme is there now and there are very few
things missing in it, that thumbs has.

Maybe you suggest that they are used together, that tumme provides
things that thumbs uses, and the other way around? I don't see much
benefit in that though. Splitting tumme into smaller chunks could be a
good thing to do, to make it more modular, but other than that I don't
see that it is worth doing.

The only problem in moving/copying/duplicating thumbs stuff into tumme
is that tumme becomes bigger, it is quite large already, but I don't
think it is unmanageable. The users would benefit; they would get the
old "simpler" things from thumbs and the "advanced" things from tumme,
all in one package.

I just added two items to tumme's todo-section. There are now only
four todos left to make tumme do everything that thumbs does, and none
of them are very hard to implement. With some help they would be done
in no time and we could have one thumbnail package that we could
continue to work on.

All this said, of course, with my usual disclaimer that I'd be equally
happy to merge tumme stuff into thumbs and make thumbs the default and
only thumbnail package. I would not volunteer to do the work
though... :)