Use the same package names as lspconfig

[raj-magesh]

I noticed this mapping table for packages (https://github.com/williamboman/mason-lspconfig.nvim/blob/main/doc/server-mapping.md) and wondered why there are two sets of package names. Is one any better than the other? It adds a (minor) extra level of confusion that could be avoided.

[williamboman]

The package names in Mason follow upstream naming conventions. An example of this would be the lua-language-server - it's not called sumneko_lua anywhere else than in lspconfig. lspconfig is also an optional plugin, you are very much able to use the LSP client without it (Mason itself doesn't care how you use installed packages). mason-lspconfig exists to help bridge these gaps, and I've also been thinking of including the lspconfig name of a package in the UI if the user has mason-lspconfig installed.

[raj-magesh]

I see, that makes a lot of sense, thanks for the explanation! I wonderwhy lspconfig chose to use non-upstream package names.