Skip to content

Remove extensionKind so that other extensions can depend on scala-syntax via SSH/WSL2 #210

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

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jul 12, 2021

Conversation

tgodzik
Copy link
Contributor

@tgodzik tgodzik commented Jul 12, 2021

Based on feedback in microsoft/vscode#128375 (comment)

@MaximeKjaer
Copy link
Contributor

Just to make sure I understand the problem correctly: Metals runs on the remote machine, and needs this extension in the remote workspace as well. And currently, since extensionKind doesn't contain workspace, this extension isn't available on the remote machine. Is that correct?

In either case, this change seems okay to me. A bit of history around this field:

@tgodzik
Copy link
Contributor Author

tgodzik commented Jul 12, 2021

Just to make sure I understand the problem correctly: Metals runs on the remote machine, and needs this extension in the remote workspace as well. And currently, since extensionKind doesn't contain workspace, this extension isn't available on the remote machine. Is that correct?

So in my opinion it's really a bug, but it seems that Metals is validated on remote, where scala-syntax is not enabled as it's installed locally, so since the last version VS Code will disable the extension.

Haskell syntax doesn't declare the extensionKind at all and it all seems to work well.

Copy link
Contributor

@MaximeKjaer MaximeKjaer left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I see, thank you for the explanation @tgodzik ! Let's get this merged and release a new version.

@MaximeKjaer MaximeKjaer merged commit fc18e5d into scala:main Jul 12, 2021
@tgodzik
Copy link
Contributor Author

tgodzik commented Jul 12, 2021

I see, thank you for the explanation @tgodzik ! Let's get this merged and release a new version.

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.

2 participants