Originally assigned to: @rockerBOO, @Penaz91, @DrKJeff16 on GitHub.
Description
After looking through many plugins I've come to the realization that the following line at the top of the README hasn't really been enforced:
> [...]This means Vim-compatible plugins are not listed here.
Should we delete that "requirement" (since it's not being enforced)? Or should we take our time to enforce it consistently?
If you ask me, the latter sounds tricky. What does "not Vim-compatible" constitute, exactly? Would enforcing that "rule" consistently cause more harm than good?
I'd love to know your takes on this.
Maybe the "not Vim-compatible" rule was the friends we made along the way...
Originally created by @DrKJeff16 on GitHub (Oct 27, 2025).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/rockerBOO/awesome-neovim/issues/1769
Originally assigned to: @rockerBOO, @Penaz91, @DrKJeff16 on GitHub.
## Description
[After looking through many plugins](https://github.com/rockerBOO/awesome-neovim/issues/1710) I've come to the realization that the following line at the top of the README hasn't really been enforced:
```markdown
> [...]This means Vim-compatible plugins are not listed here.
```
Should we delete that "requirement" (since it's not being enforced)? Or should we take our time to enforce it consistently?
If you ask me, the latter sounds tricky. What does _"not Vim-compatible"_ constitute, exactly? Would enforcing that "rule" consistently cause more harm than good?
I'd love to know your takes on this.
---
<div align="center"><h2><em>Maybe the <ins>"not Vim-compatible"</ins> rule was the friends we made along the way...</em></h2></div>
I think the meaning is along the lines of "You're going to find plugins that target primarily Neovim and, eventually, the original Vim as a side effect".
If we were to go with the strictest "Anything that works on Vim is out" half of the plugins would be out, I think.
<!-- gh-comment-id:3452644544 -->
@Penaz91 commented on GitHub (Oct 27, 2025):
I think the meaning is along the lines of "You're going to find plugins that target primarily Neovim and, eventually, the original Vim as a side effect".
If we were to go with the strictest "Anything that works on Vim is out" half of the plugins would be out, I think.
I think the meaning is along the lines of "You're going to find plugins that target primarily Neovim and, eventually, the original Vim as a side effect".
@Penaz91 I see. Nevertheless, I am slightly put off by the wording. THIS IS NOT A PRIORITY ISSUE, mind you. Likely a non-issue, even. But it probably is worth thinking about.
If we were to go with the strictest "Anything that works on Vim is out" half of the plugins would be out, I think.
Exactly!
<!-- gh-comment-id:3452664411 -->
@DrKJeff16 commented on GitHub (Oct 27, 2025):
> I think the meaning is along the lines of "You're going to find plugins that target primarily Neovim and, eventually, the original Vim as a side effect".
@Penaz91 I see. Nevertheless, I am slightly put off by the wording. THIS IS NOT A PRIORITY ISSUE, mind you. Likely a non-issue, even. But it probably is worth thinking about.
---
> If we were to go with the strictest "Anything that works on Vim is out" half of the plugins would be out, I think.
Exactly!
This was originally put in when Neovim was a bit less popular. Most plugins then would be Vim plugins that also worked on Neovim. Since then Lua has taken over for most plugins, and the number of plugins specific for Neovim is much higher. Any plugin that uses Lua will count as being specific for Neovim in my mind, though maybe more specifically they use any Neovim API works.
This is because there are over 19k Vim plugins out there so wanted some distinction between Vim specific plugins and Neovim plugins mixing on here, making it much harder to manage.
From what I have seen most plugins here are using Lua and are using at least 1 Neovim API.
<!-- gh-comment-id:3453821091 -->
@rockerBOO commented on GitHub (Oct 27, 2025):
This was originally put in when Neovim was a bit less popular. Most plugins then would be Vim plugins that also worked on Neovim. Since then Lua has taken over for most plugins, and the number of plugins specific for Neovim is much higher. Any plugin that uses Lua will count as being specific for Neovim in my mind, though maybe more specifically they use any Neovim API works.
This is because there are over 19k Vim plugins out there so wanted some distinction between Vim specific plugins and Neovim plugins mixing on here, making it much harder to manage.
From what I have seen most plugins here are using Lua and are using at least 1 Neovim API.
how about a plugin named foo without -nvim or -vim at the beginning or end. and this plugin use following logic:
if has-nvim then
--- using vim.api
else
--- using native lua api or vim.fn
end
<!-- gh-comment-id:3466236202 -->
@wsdjeg commented on GitHub (Oct 30, 2025):
how about a plugin named `foo` without `-nvim` or `-vim` at the beginning or end. and this plugin use following logic:
```
if has-nvim then
--- using vim.api
else
--- using native lua api or vim.fn
end
```
@wsdjeg Honest question: Do plugins actually use something like that normally?
<!-- gh-comment-id:3474684109 -->
@DrKJeff16 commented on GitHub (Oct 31, 2025):
@wsdjeg Honest question: Do plugins actually use something like that normally?
Blocking a user prevents them from interacting with repositories, such as opening or commenting on pull requests or issues. Learn more about blocking a user.
Originally created by @DrKJeff16 on GitHub (Oct 27, 2025).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/rockerBOO/awesome-neovim/issues/1769
Originally assigned to: @rockerBOO, @Penaz91, @DrKJeff16 on GitHub.
Description
After looking through many plugins I've come to the realization that the following line at the top of the README hasn't really been enforced:
Should we delete that "requirement" (since it's not being enforced)? Or should we take our time to enforce it consistently?
If you ask me, the latter sounds tricky. What does "not Vim-compatible" constitute, exactly? Would enforcing that "rule" consistently cause more harm than good?
I'd love to know your takes on this.
Maybe the "not Vim-compatible" rule was the friends we made along the way...
@Penaz91 commented on GitHub (Oct 27, 2025):
I think the meaning is along the lines of "You're going to find plugins that target primarily Neovim and, eventually, the original Vim as a side effect".
If we were to go with the strictest "Anything that works on Vim is out" half of the plugins would be out, I think.
@DrKJeff16 commented on GitHub (Oct 27, 2025):
@Penaz91 I see. Nevertheless, I am slightly put off by the wording. THIS IS NOT A PRIORITY ISSUE, mind you. Likely a non-issue, even. But it probably is worth thinking about.
Exactly!
@rockerBOO commented on GitHub (Oct 27, 2025):
This was originally put in when Neovim was a bit less popular. Most plugins then would be Vim plugins that also worked on Neovim. Since then Lua has taken over for most plugins, and the number of plugins specific for Neovim is much higher. Any plugin that uses Lua will count as being specific for Neovim in my mind, though maybe more specifically they use any Neovim API works.
This is because there are over 19k Vim plugins out there so wanted some distinction between Vim specific plugins and Neovim plugins mixing on here, making it much harder to manage.
From what I have seen most plugins here are using Lua and are using at least 1 Neovim API.
@wsdjeg commented on GitHub (Oct 30, 2025):
how about a plugin named
foowithout-nvimor-vimat the beginning or end. and this plugin use following logic:@DrKJeff16 commented on GitHub (Oct 31, 2025):
@wsdjeg Honest question: Do plugins actually use something like that normally?