Suggestion: Allow extension packs to not be defined by dependencies

[chrisdias]

An "extension pack" is generally a curated collection of extensions targeted at a specific scenario. The Azure extension pack installs 10+ extensions all related to Azure. As a user I might be interested in 8 of the extensions and want to uninstall the rest.

However, it is hard to uninstall a subset of the pack because those extensions are defined as dependencies of the extension pack extension.

Suggest that we introduce a mechanism where I can define a collection of extensions (an extension pack), but they are not dependencies of the root extension. That way I can (as a user) install an extension pack for Python or Azure or [fill in the blank], see all the cool extensions, and then manage individual ones more easily.

[sandy081]

I do not think we can go away from using dependencies for extension packs as it has become a sort of API. Your requirement looks like asking for optional dependencies ?

[akaroml]

I'd like to echo this one. #48873 was logged against the similar issue.
What we'd like to have is to have all dependency extensions installed but not loaded when the pack extension is loaded as a normal extension.

[tboby]

My use case for this would be a recommended language colorizer. Most users will be happy with the language colorizer I provide, but I don't want to force them to use it if they prefer another.

My plan was to have the colorizer as an extensionDependency, but it sounds like that would override any other extensions.

[chrisdias]

Here is another scenario where the current model is problematic:

• Install the Node Pack for Azure extension
• Reload
• In the Extension Viewlet, click on the ... menu and choose Disable all installed extensions

Result:

• For a number of the extensions, I'm prompted to uninstall the dependencies as well (the Azure Account extension, which is a dependency of the App Service extension):

• Once done, I get three errors:

But they are actually disabled on reload.

[sandy081]

@chrisdias Above scenario is a bug. Please file a separate issue for that.

[chrisdias]

ok, filed: #49929

[AvinZarlez]

+1 to this.

I have an extension pack, and people like portions of it but want to be able to disable one or two of the extensions if they chose not to have them.

There should be an "optional dependency" system instead? Perhaps installs by default and/or asks, but then allows disabling/uninstalling?

[toxikman]

Agree - I too would like to see optional dependencies for packs.

[akaroml]

Good to see it's in the June plan. Can't wait!

[sandy081]

Sorry could not make this in June. Deferring to July.