Warning showing when requiring the ('mason.lspconfig').setup

[nehamand]

Before Reporting an Issue

• I have read the kickstart.nvim README.md.

• I have read the appropiate plugin's documentation.

• I have searched that this issue has not been reported before.

• [x ] By checking this, I confirm that the above steps are completed. I understand leaving this unchecked will result in this report being closed immediately.

Describe the bug

On line 669 on the init.lua file, there is a warning stating that the mason.lspconfig setup is missing required fields in type MasonLspconfigSettings: ensure_installed, automatic_installation [missing-fields].

To Reproduce

1. Just clone the repo and open it in neovim, go the line 669 and you will see the lua-lsp pointing to the warning.

Desktop

• OS: Mac Os Sequoia 15.1
• Terminal: Warp

Neovim Version

0.10.3

[BALAJI24092001]

I have the same issue, the LSP for lua seems to generate those warnings. There won't be any problem with the highlighted warnings. But I wouldn't want them to pop on screen either. I added the ensure_installed = {} which removed one warning, but the other one I didn't. It should probably work. Add them and leave them blank.

[nhld]

Hi,
You might want to uncomment this line:

kickstart.nvim/init.lua

Lines 639 to 645 in db4867a

	Lua = {
	completion = {
	callSnippet = 'Replace',
	},
	-- You can toggle below to ignore Lua_LS's noisy `missing-fields` warnings
	-- diagnostics = { disable = { 'missing-fields' } },
	},

Hope this helps!

[feoh]

@nhld Should we consider uncommenting this by default?

I feel like we get a constant stream of these issues, all well meant, and I don't blame folks for filing them, but they're kinda noise.

What's the down side if any?

[BALAJI24092001]

I suppose uncommenting is better. It could be confusing for beginners to see unnecessary warnings. It doesn't seem to have any downside so far for me.

[feoh]

No, the warnings are essentially meaningless, but they cause well meaning folks to file bug after bug after bug :)

Let me ask the same question from a different angle: Does having these warnings benefit anyone ever?

[BALAJI24092001]

They do.

kickstart.nvim/init.lua

Lines 639 to 645 in db4867a

	Lua = {
	completion = {
	callSnippet = 'Replace',
	},
	-- You can toggle below to ignore Lua_LS's noisy `missing-fields` warnings
	-- diagnostics = { disable = { 'missing-fields' } },
	},

I suppose a comment of this sort can benefit either groups of people. Since it's in mason-lspconfig, adding an extra line can be a benefit.

[nhld]

How about using ---@diagnostic disable-next-line: missing-fields to suppress the warning? We can have a warning-free init.lua without disabling diagnostics. We can remove the diagnostics disable comments later when the upstream plugin's author or contributors make those fields optional.

Do we have to disable it? The suggested approach seems to get the job done as well.