GNU bug report logs - #61624
30.0.50; [PATCH] More doc on image-dired-dired-*

Previous Next

Full log

Message #11 received at 61624 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Manuel Giraud <manuel <at> ledu-giraud.fr>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 61624 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#61624: 30.0.50; [PATCH] More doc on image-dired-dired-*
Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2023 14:16:34 +0100

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:

> Thanks.  I have a few comments:

Hi Eli,

Here is a new version that adresses most of your comments.

[0001-More-doc-on-image-dired-dired-bug-61624.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[Message part 3 (text/plain, inline)]

[...]

>>    You can delete images through Image-Dired also.  Type @kbd{d}
>>  (@code{image-dired-flag-thumb-original-file}) to flag the image file
>> -for deletion in the Dired buffer.  You can also delete the thumbnail
>> +for deletion in the Dired buffer.  You can also remove the thumbnail
>>  image from the thumbnail buffer with @kbd{C-d}
>>  (@code{image-dired-delete-char}).
>
> Not sure I understand the reason for this.  "Deletion" goes together
> with "delete", so why use "remove" instead?

You're right that it goes with "delete" from the command name but I
thought that "remove" is better because no file is deleted from this
operation.  Only the thumbnail is removed from the thumbnails buffer.
Maybe my english is a bit off here.
-- 
Manuel Giraud

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.