Re: thumbs.el and transparency

[Juri Linkov]

> 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?

I thought about sharing common customizable options like `thumbs-per-line'
and `tumme-thumbs-per-row', `thumbs-relief' and `tumme-thumb-relief',
`thumbs-conversion-program' and `tumme-cmd-create-thumbnail-program', etc.
by leaving these options in thumbs.el and allowing tumme.el to use them,
so users could customize both packages with the same options.

I based my reasoning on an opinion expressed on this thread that both
packages should exist in Emacs.  But actually I have no opinion about this.
Given the choice between a simple thumbnail package and more advanced one,
I personally would definitely select the latter.

> In my opinion, tumme is there now and there are very few things missing
> in it, that thumbs has.

I think instead of adding all features of thumbs.el to tumme.el it is more
urgent to make tumme.el more usable, so it would have more than one user ;-)

-- 
Juri Linkov
http://www.jurta.org/emacs/