New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Remove obsolete lsp-clangd and lsp-python #5894

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
from

Conversation

Projects
None yet
4 participants
@tarsius
Copy link
Member

tarsius commented Dec 30, 2018

These packages are no longer needed when using lsp-mode's master branch and they also fail to load because they require lsp-common, which no longer exists. However when installing from Melpa Stable, then they are probably still required, so we can't really remove them yet.

Maybe there should be a way to remove a package from Melpa but keep it in Melpa Stable?

@tarsius

This comment has been minimized.

@yyoncho

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

yyoncho commented Jan 2, 2019

You may remove also: lsp-javascript, lsp-ruby, lsp-go, lsp-rust, lsp-php, lsp-sh, lsp-html, lsp-groovy, lsp-ocaml .

@tarsius

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member Author

tarsius commented Jan 12, 2019

@yyoncho We can do that once that doesn't cause breakage for users installing lsp-mode from Melpa Stable. When do you plan to release a version of lsp-mode that contains all the merged formerly-separate language specific libraries?

Also, why is this being done? The general trend for Emacs packages seems to be to break out such additional libraries into separate packages or even repositories. Why are you doing the opposite? (Not saying it is wrong, but such changes cause the Melpa maintainers work so it would be nice to know why this is being done.

@Trevoke Re #5903. You are going with the Emacs trend and against the lsp-* trend.

@yyoncho

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

yyoncho commented Jan 12, 2019

@tarsius
I am planning to address one or two issues in this release. I hope to do the release by the end of next week.

Also, why is this being done?

A couple of things:

  1. We wanted to decrease the configuration complexity based on the user feedback
  2. In latest lsp-mode some of the configuration that used to be part of the packages is now provided by lsp-mode in a generic way. As a result, some of the packages were diminished to a single call.
  3. It was easier to migrate the packages to the new interface. There was a period in which both lsp-mode interfaces were supported.

Note that the more complex lsp extensions were not absorbed(like lsp-java, cquery) and

@dmacvicar

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

dmacvicar commented Jan 12, 2019

@yyoncho in #5972 my list is a bit longer than yours. Am I missing something?

  • lsp-clangd
  • lsp-css
  • lsp-dart
  • lsp-fortran
  • lsp-go
  • lsp-html
  • lsp-javascript-typescript
  • lsp-ocaml
  • lsp-php
  • lsp-python
  • lsp-ruby
  • lsp-rust
  • lsp-sh
  • lsp-typescript
  • lsp-vue
@yyoncho

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

yyoncho commented Jan 12, 2019

@dmacvicar your list seems to be ok

@tarsius

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member Author

tarsius commented Jan 21, 2019

@yyoncho I see lsp-mode v6.0 has been released. Does that mean that all those lsp-<language> packages are obsolete now even when using only Melpa Stable and that the respective recipes can therefore be removed?

@yyoncho

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

yyoncho commented Jan 21, 2019

@tarsius Yes.

@Trevoke

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

Trevoke commented Jan 21, 2019

Such rapid development indicates that maybe the version number for lsp-mode would be below 1.0 if following semver?

As for the emacs/lsp trend: We are interested in providing an Elixir-specific tool. There are some code actions that don't make sense in other languages, and we would like to also provide the servers and a way to choose (different servers for different versions of Erlang).

We would like to depend on lsp-mode's API to simplify the work.

@yyoncho

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

yyoncho commented Jan 21, 2019

@Trevoke

Such rapid development indicates that maybe the version number for lsp-mode would be below 1.0 if following semver?

When I became the maintainer the version was 5.0 and I did one big redesign so the only option was to use 6.0 but I guess you are right. At this point, I am considering the API to be stable.

As for the elixir tool I guess it is related to https://github.com/elixir-lsp/lsp-elixir.el, right ? You may ping me on gitter so we can discuss what you are trying to achieve(or move the discussion in the corresponding repo). If I had understood you correctly you may create a language server which runs in parallel with the ElixirLS and provides only code actions.

@tarsius

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member Author

tarsius commented Jan 21, 2019

There recipes and more were removed with #5972.

@tarsius tarsius closed this Jan 21, 2019

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment