refactor!: remove nvim and provider module for checkhealth

[dundargoc]

The namespacing for healthchecks for neovim modules is inconsistent and
confusing. The completion for :checkhealth with --clean gives

nvim
provider.clipboard
provider.node
provider.perl
provider.python
provider.ruby
vim.lsp
vim.treesitter

There are now three top-level module names for nvim: nvim, provider
and vim with no signs of stopping. The nvim name is especially
confusing as it does not contain all neovim checkhealths, which makes it
almost a decoy healthcheck.

The confusion only worsens if you add plugins to the mix:

lazy
mason
nvim
nvim-treesitter
provider.clipboard
provider.node
provider.perl
provider.python
provider.ruby
telescope
vim.lsp
vim.treesitter

Another problem with the current approach is that it's not easy to run
nvim-only healthchecks since they don't share the same namespace. The
current approach would be to run :che nvim vim.* provider.* and would
also require the user to know these are the neovim modules.

Instead, use this alternative structure:

vim.health
vim.lsp
vim.provider.clipboard
vim.provider.node
vim.provider.perl
vim.provider.python
vim.provider.ruby
vim.treesitter

and

lazy
mason
nvim-treesitter
telescope
vim.health
vim.lsp
vim.provider.clipboard
vim.provider.node
vim.provider.perl
vim.provider.python
vim.provider.ruby
vim.treesitter

Now, the entries are properly sorted and running nvim-only healthchecks
requires running only :che vim.*.

[dundargoc]

Future improvements:

• Reduce the five provider checks into a single checks. Triple nested checkhealths is overkill in granularity.
• :checkhealth vim should run all healthchecks under the vim module IMO. Right now it does nothing and requires it to be run as a glob with :checkhealth vim.*.
• Maybe remove the globbing functionality entirely and focus solely on module based healthchecks (meaning :che vi* would not work). I suspect this functionality isn't well known tbh. On the other hand it's not expensive, but on the other other hand with module-based approach and improved completion we wouldn't need to rely on globbing.

[wookayin]

Looks great, and I like the change. But shouldn't it be mentioned in news.txt?

[dundargoc]

Tbh does anyone care about this?

[justinmk]

"nvim" was for non-provider checks, especially configuration-related checks. Is :che vim.health now the way to do that? The provider checks can be slow.

[dundargoc]

"nvim" was for non-provider checks, especially configuration-related checks.

I know, but neovim is the only thing that has multiple top-level checkhealth modules. Remember, there was no real way to run neovim only healthchecks before.

Is :che vim.health now the way to do that?

Ye, because runtime/vim/health.vim which provides vim.health is blocking the :checkhealth vim space. Not much that can be done. I'm up for suggestions if you have something else in mind. Something like :checkhealth vim.config?

[justinmk]

As long as there's a way to run non-provider Nvim checks, I think it's fine. Not worried about the name too much, in this case.