Add Repology Badge, Helping with Package Managers

[schrieveslaach]

This PR adds the Repology badge to the README.md to guide users with the installation process.

[eclipse-ls-bot]

Can one of the admins verify this patch?

[rgrunber]

@fbricon , any reason not to include this in the README ? It looks a bit odd to see JDT-LS pacakged independent of a client (as often the integration can be tight) but if there is work to consume it this way, or even just as a library, maybe we should show it.

[fbricon]

the thing that bothers me a bit is if we start advertising it on the readme, it's akin to saying we own and maintain those 3rd party packages, which is not the case. @testforstephen thoughts?

[schrieveslaach]

the thing that bothers me a bit is if we start advertising it on the readme, it's akin to saying we own and maintain those 3rd party packages, which is not the case.

I could add comment that this is a least of package manager entries that are maintained by individuals that are not distinct from the list of jdtls' maintainers.

[testforstephen]

the thing that bothers me a bit is if we start advertising it on the readme, it's akin to saying we own and maintain those 3rd party packages, which is not the case. @testforstephen thoughts?

I have the same concern. Currently, the problem with the website https://repology.org/project/jdtls/versions is that it doesn't have a clear identifier to tell users whether the download source is maintained by a verified owner. If we start to advertise it in eclipse.jdt.ls README, this will give users the impression that the download source is verified by eclipse.jdt.ls. The verification is beyond our current scope.

[rgrunber]

If this isn't going to happen, then let's close it for now and maybe we can re-evaluate in the future.

This is different than listing known clients in https://github.com/eclipse/eclipse.jdt.ls#clients, since we rely on clients for integration.