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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Remove delete_existing option; Introduce archive #409

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
Jul 2, 2023
Merged

Remove delete_existing option; Introduce archive #409

merged 6 commits into from
Jul 2, 2023

Conversation

azrv
Copy link
Contributor

@azrv azrv commented Jun 25, 2023

Remove delete_existing run option, instead archive memory and workspace on every run;

archive is a step since some flows don't generate code and therefore should not archive whatever

Relates to #388

@AntonOsika
Copy link
Collaborator

Great work!

Added some comments.

Mainly I think we shouldn't let archive be a "step" but we just call it.

Also, feel free to delete the "run_id" functionality.

AntonOsika
AntonOsika requested changes Jun 26, 2023
View reviewed changes
gpt_engineer/db.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
gpt_engineer/main.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
gpt_engineer/main.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
gpt_engineer/steps.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
gpt_engineer/steps.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
gpt_engineer/steps.py
@@ -280,15 +295,17 @@ class Config(str, Enum):
# Different configs of what steps to run
STEPS = {
Config.DEFAULT: [
archive,
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Let's not make archive a step in this sense, but just call it before we loop over steps!

@azrv
Copy link
Contributor Author

azrv commented Jun 26, 2023

Great work!

Added some comments.

Mainly I think we shouldn't let archive be a "step" but we just call it.

Also, feel free to delete the "run_id" functionality.

@AntonOsika

  1. My main concern about archiving NOT being a step is there are "flows" that don't generate code (e.g. EXECUTE_ONLY, EVALUATE) and therefore should not archive things by default. How do we make sure to skip archiving in those cases?
    While working on PR I realised archiving functionality complicates code a lot and I'm no sure it provides us any good.
    What's inherently wrong with delete_existing?

  2. Sure! Could you please elaborate on what run_id is
    I can't seem to find it (not so familiar with the codebase yet)
    git grep run_id gives nothing

@azrv azrv requested a review from AntonOsika June 28, 2023 02:40
@AntonOsika
Copy link
Collaborator

Merging!

@AntonOsika AntonOsika merged commit 60e0a7e into gpt-engineer-org:main Jul 2, 2023
3 of 4 checks passed
@AntonOsika
Copy link
Collaborator

Thanks for the submission @azrv !

Do you want to join discord and DM me there? Happy to chat about future improvements!

@AntonOsika
Copy link
Collaborator

AntonOsika commented Jul 2, 2023 •
edited
Loading

Already cleaned up run_id (was called run_prefix)

70ziko pushed a commit to 70ziko/gpt-engineer that referenced this pull request Oct 25, 2023
@azrv @AntonOsika @70ziko
Remove delete_existing option; Introduce archive (gpt-engineer-org#409
3115f1e 
)

* Remove `delete_existing` option; Introduce archive

* Update gpt_engineer/db.py

* Update gpt_engineer/main.py

* Update gpt_engineer/main.py

* Update gpt_engineer/steps.py

* Update gpt_engineer/steps.py

---------

Co-authored-by: Anton Osika <anton.osika@gmail.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@AntonOsika AntonOsika Awaiting requested review from AntonOsika

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
2 participants
@azrv @AntonOsika