feat: add automatic_installation option to the setup table #638
Conversation
williamboman
changed the title
williamboman
force-pushed
the
feat/ensure-installed-on_demand
branch
2 times, most recently
from
c7bc86a to
d5d2db0
Compare
williamboman
force-pushed
the
feat/ensure-installed-on_demand
branch
from
d5d2db0 to
b23b6d5
Compare
williamboman
changed the title
williamboman
force-pushed
the
feat/ensure-installed-on_demand
branch
from
b23b6d5 to
20cebcf
Compare
| @@ -25,6 +26,9 @@ function M.register_lspconfig_hook() | |||
| local ok, server = servers.get_server(config.name) | |||
| if ok then | |||
| merge_in_place(config, server._default_options) | |||
| if settings.current.automatic_installation and not server:is_installed() then | |||
| server:install() | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is not blocking, isn't it? So installing would take some time for downloading and unpacking, say 10 seconds. But this hook will be executed when lspconfig[...].setup is called. How do we ensure server is ready and available at this moment, or lspconfig[...].setup is scheduled to be invoked later after the installation is complete?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Nope, it's not blocking!
How do we ensure server is ready and available at this moment, or lspconfig[...].setup is scheduled to be invoked later after the installation is complete?
We don't, anymore. It's one of the drawbacks, but I'd almost argue that's now a usability issue with lspconfig? (the exact same problem exists if you aren't using nvim-lsp-installer)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks, so my understanding was correct. Actually this was to point out some potential problems in the logical flow rather than just questions:
So even if we do server:install(), the installation won't be complete until the actual lspconfig[..].setup { } call that immediately follows this on_setup hook. Therefore the missing LSP still not work as expected this time (despite automatic_installation), with a hope that the missing LSP will work next time. I feel this can be a bit confusing to users. I know there's nothing much we can do here other than starting installation of missing lsp servers, but at least there could be some notifications or documentation about the timing and behavior.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah I want to improve this, will let the new things settle for a while first!
|
This is an awesome feature I am looking forward to using it. Is there any way for us to improve this to check the current user's path to see if they already have an language server installed outside of For instance if I wan to use |
Personally I'm not a fan of such a feature, although I see it could be valuable. I guess what's done in #643 could be further extended in the future to allow skipping servers that are already available on PATH (although, what "being available" actually means is up for debate) |
|
@williamboman I looked into this a bit and made an example PR (#645) of what I have in my head. Let me know what you think or if you think it aligns with what you envision. Thanks so much! |
This allows users to automatically install all servers that are setup via lspconfig.