3 ms·
Why reverting it instead of adding upon it? The author of the revert could easily start working on reintroducing the previous format behind a flag. AFAIK llama.
by augusto-moura 4y ago
Why reverting it instead of adding upon it? The author of the revert could easily start working on reintroducing the previous format behind a flag. AFAIK llama.cpp is not even v1 yet. I see this revert PR as unnecessary
- jimbob45 4y agoFeature flags are great but they should not be used as a crutch to leave unfinished or non-working code in the codebase. IMO they should be used to rapidly pull back the change before the slower revert can take place.
- jasonjmcghee 4y agoI’m not in the know at all here, but the original PR wasn’t purely additive- there was code deletion, and additions across a number of files. It seems to change the checkpoint format. The code should be abstracted differently for it to be placed behind a flag.
- augusto-moura 4y agoI understood that, but it was accepted. We don't need to cry over the spilled milk, one can re-add the previous model based on the removal PR. No need to push a revert