Should we remove nlsp settings?

[ChristianChiarulli]

I forget if I've asked this before

[quantumfate]

yes it barely supports anything useful

[chaozwn]

i think it's a good idea to remove nlsp settings.

[meijieru]

It enables an easy way to customize the lsp per project.

[chaozwn]

It enables an easy way to customize the lsp per project.

hi, guy. can you tell the way how to customize the lsp.

[nieomylnieja]

yes it barely supports anything useful

that's a very shallow statement, bear in mind it's used to configure LSP servers themselves, not the nvim wrapper for them (like filetype options). It supports all the major LSPs out there, so again, not really sure what are you basing your opinion on. As @meijieru mentioned, it also allows an easy way to manage per project config.
It is definitely not sth and average user would ever use though, maybe it's a bit of an overkill to have it maintained within LunarVim. On the other hand I'm not sure how much of a pain would it be to add it outside of the lsp setup within lvim core, If it's to be removed, I'd definitely explain in the example plugin configurations on how to configure it.

[LostNeophyte]

pros and cons of removing it that I can think of at the moment:

• it's barely maintained, the readme still uses lsp-installer in the examples instead of mason, there's a two month old pr to fix that with no comments from the maintainer
• most users probably don't know how and don't use it

cons:

• breaking change
• I prefer nlsp-settings over our way of configuring lsp servers, it requires way less effort and there's completion

we could switch to folke/neoconf instead

[github-actions]

This issue is stale because it has been open for 50 days with no activity.

[github-actions]

This issue is stale because it has been open for 50 days with no activity.

[github-actions]

This issue was closed because it has been inactive for 14 days since being marked as stale.