Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

RAFT raft.py CLI arguments naming broke --embedding-model and --completion-model in PR #410 #414

Open
cedricvidal opened this issue May 8, 2024 · 1 comment · May be fixed by #420
Open
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@cedricvidal
Copy link
Contributor

cedricvidal commented May 8, 2024

Is the feature request related to a problem?
PR #410 introduced a breaking change in the CLI arguments names:

  • --embedding-model was renamed to --embedding_model
  • --completion-model was renamed to --completion_model

It also breaks the documentation which stills uses the dash-case naming convention.

It seems like this was done to align to the double dash prefixed snake-case naming convention used with the other --chunk_size argument.

Here are the changed lines:
624d371#diff-b81150e1021ea386316094b5858fd74e2cbc1b1f1acc1dc37ed63d1507c87727L38-R44

Describe the solution you'd like
Having a consistent naming convention is important but the double dash prefixed snake case convention is quite unusual for CLI arguments. They usually use the dash-case naming convention.

While this is not a big deal, I would vote to change all arguments to dash-case like so:

  • --embedding-model
  • --completion-model
  • --chunk-size

This would also align with the dash-case convention used in eval.py.

@cedricvidal cedricvidal added the enhancement New feature or request label May 8, 2024
@kaiwen129
Copy link
Contributor

Hi Cedric, I'd certainly be open to using dash-case for all arguments. I did originally use snake case to align with the chunk_size argument but I think what you said makes more sense.

@cedricvidal cedricvidal linked a pull request May 9, 2024 that will close this issue
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants