Skip to content

Conversation

@rtmcrc
Copy link

@rtmcrc rtmcrc commented Jul 19, 2024

No description provided.

@captivus
Copy link
Collaborator

Thanks for raising this PR @rtmcrc! Please resolve the errors raised by each of the checks so that we can proceed reviewing your PR.

@rtmcrc
Copy link
Author

rtmcrc commented Jul 20, 2024

Done

@viborc
Copy link
Collaborator

viborc commented Jul 25, 2024

Done

Thanks for this; we will check it!

@viborc viborc requested review from captivus and zigabrencic July 25, 2024 17:40
@viborc
Copy link
Collaborator

viborc commented Aug 8, 2024

@captivus could you please take a look at this one? I asked you and @zigabrencic to review it. Would love to see this merged soon so we support Gemini 1.5!

load_dotenv(dotenv_path=os.path.join(os.getcwd(), ".env"))


def model_env():
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is there a way so that we "merge" the model_env() and load_env_if_needed() functions? So to simplify the logic here a bit?

Or what was the idea behind adding this function.

Copy link
Author

@rtmcrc rtmcrc Aug 8, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Good idea, do as you consider it is efficient. I've made a separate function so that it's not called twice.

load_env_if_needed() is called on line 460 and model_env() on 298

Have no clue why it was placed so far, maybe there was a reason, didn't get much into it. 🤷‍♂️

@viborc
Copy link
Collaborator

viborc commented Sep 12, 2024

@captivus can you please review when you catch a moment=

@thiagobutignon
Copy link

Any update on this?

@shikhar1verma
Copy link

Hey @viborc, @captivus and @zigabrencic are we merging this?

If we are not merging this due to some issues. I can take those up. Test it properly. And update required documentations as well for gemini support.

But only if we are really thinking to add gemini support for gpt engineer.

If we will not merge this. Then also I am thinking to having its support in my local branch and test it properly in my local only.

Let me know whatever is the decision.

@viborc
Copy link
Collaborator

viborc commented Aug 4, 2025

Hello everyone! Thank you for this PR and comments, but I'm sorry to say that this project is no longer actively maintained by the original board and staff.

If you'd like to see it go forward, I'd suggest forking it and using it as an experimentation platform, but make sure to follow the original license and if the original creator (@AntonOsika) has made any other changes or plans.

Thank you all for contributing to this project, and I hope to see the lessons learned applied in our domain and industry.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants