Separate themes from extensions (extension metadata scanner?)

[AlbatorLaho]

One thing that's annoyed me (and other people I know), is when themes are lumped in with other extensions...
I get that functionally, they can be very similar... but when installing them, it's much nicer to have them separated. That way, there's no (or less) confusion about what it is you're actually installing.
e.g. some people don't always put "theme" in the name, so it can be confusing sometimes... but maybe putting "theme" in the name will be enforced in Zed though? (I'd still prefer them to be "separate" though)

My thoughts would be to have separate "sections" for extensions, themes, and maybe icon packs too. (but this seems like it could get messy, and wouldn't be very modular/extensible)
So probably a better way to do it, is have some kind of extension filtering, where you can filter by "tags" or something... with that, it'd be nice to know how many themes are actually getting installed, if they're light/dark, &c.
Along with that, some kind of extension "scanner" could be really cool/nice, where it could scan the extension's code, and report metadata on what the extension does, what APIs it uses, &c. (and could maybe be used to auto-tag extensions as themes)

And if there isn't something like this in Zed already, I would think there should be something enforcing that themes are nothing but a theme... e.g. Emacs' "themes" are the same as any other extension, and can run any arbitrary code...

[drcongo]

There's issues for this already, #17120 though annoyingly the ones that specifically talk about the annoyance of themes and extensions being lumped together have been closed in favour of this one: #10340 which, in my opinion, doesn't solve the problem. I don't want to see themes in the extensions panel at all - I made my own theme and that's the only one I ever want to use. Wading through all the themes trying to find interesting extensions is a pain.

[AlbatorLaho]

Ugh, why does GitHub's searching suck so much? I swear I look extensively for stuff like this, and I can't find it... maybe I just don't know how to properly use it.

Anyway, #10340 seems to be half way there... but definitely seems pretty limited—unless it's implemented really well. :/

[drcongo]

Yeah, I knew that #17120 existed already but still had trouble searching for it.