Skip to content
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

docs: remove a description about the outdated way of overriding query #5596

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

wookayin
Copy link
Member

@wookayin wookayin commented Oct 31, 2023

This saying that "all queries found in the runtime directories will be
combined" was true prior to 0.8.0, but since neovim/neovim#20117 query
files are no longer concatenated but the first query file on runtimepath
will be used.

This documentation section has already been fixed in the main branch
but we still have to correct the wrong, outdated information for the
current versions of neovim and nvim-treesitter until it becomes the new
default.

(The old docs was written in 2021 for neovim 0.7.x, see #2011)

@wookayin
Copy link
Member Author

/cc @stsewd @clason

README.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@clason
Copy link
Contributor

clason commented Oct 31, 2023

The whole readme is an obsolete mess... I've refrained from touching it to avoid (more) rebase conflicts on the main branch, though.

This saying that "all queries found in the runtime directories will be
combined" was true prior to 0.8.0, but since neovim/neovim#20117 query
files are no longer concatenated but the first query file on runtimepath
will be used.

This documentation section has already been fixed in the `main` branch
but we still have to correct the wrong, outdated information for the
current versions of neovim and nvim-treesitter until it becomes the new
default.
@wookayin
Copy link
Member Author

wookayin commented Dec 4, 2023

Will this be merged?

@camoz
Copy link

camoz commented May 20, 2024

Just wanted to say that I think it would be nice if this was merged, since right now what is said in the Readme is wrong (which is kind of worse than no documentation at all).

I don't know about the 1.0 timeline, but if significantly modifying the current (master branch) Readme is really not an option, maybe just put a big fat warning at the top that it's partly outdated?

I think it would be very helpful, at least for me if would have been.

Thanks!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

5 participants