3 ms·

> Mistral Code Enterprise is a fork of Continue. All due credit to the original creators of Continue. Source: https://marketplace.visualstudio.com/items?itemNa

> Mistral Code Enterprise is a fork of Continue. All due credit to the original creators of Continue. Source: https://marketplace.visualstudio.com/items?itemName=mistralai.mistral-code https://marketplace.visualstudio.com/items?itemName=mistrala... Link destination: https://www.continue.dev/ https://www.continue.dev/

tensor 1y ago
Interesting. So if you just configure continue with Mistral Medium 3 as the chat model and codestral as the autocomplete, you probably have exactly this. This is the setup I already use.
- speerer 1y ago
  If that were the case, then the posted URL would be pure hype. I think it's more likely that they've developed something that is more bespoke than that. It's totally too hard to say though.
  - tensor 1y ago
    Knowing the enterprise space, my guess is that the only real changes are hardcoding continue to use only Mistral, and tying it into some sort of central enterprise licensing service. Holding back some novel models just for enterprise use seems unlikely, as does developing some novel agentic capabilities within Continue. Enterprise deals are usually around compliance and security primarily. Companies want centralized billing and to be sure that their developers only use "sanctioned" AI and other tech. Who knows though with that contact us sales wall.
- ttoinou 1y ago
  Interesting, why do you use those models ? They feel inferior
  - tensor 1y ago
    Originally as an experiment in using non-US services, as my company is not a US company and the possibility of tariffs on digital services is not at all unrealistic. The exercise was really enlightening. Not to derail the conversation the TLDR was that in some areas it was easy to move off US services, while in others (github) there are almost no alternatives. I do have access to US models via Kagi to play around with and use for things Mistral doesn't work on. I've been meaning to try command a too, but haven't gotten around to it. I will say that the new mistral medium model is surprisingly good, though I've only just started using it. Codestral is definitely behind other models.
    - ttoinou 1y ago
      What feature of github is lacking in competetitors ? I wouldnt use an AI LLM that has 50% of chance of me needing to reprompt or try another model, I prefer using direclty the best model directly. But yeah US vs. Europe is a real concern
- killerstorm 1y ago
  The page suggests it's possible to fine-tune models on your code base
  - tensor 1y ago
    That's very possible. You can already do that via the platform api easily (just feeding it your github project), so a light UI around that api would be very easy.
behnamoh 1y ago
This is why I don't like open sourcing my projects anymore. Someone else with more resources just forks it and makes profits, thinking that merely acknowledging me pays my bills. For years, ollama didn't acknowledge llama.cpp and r/localllama found it weird until they finally mentioned llama.cpp on their page, but the damage is done: most apps that support local LLMs only support ollama or LM Studio API, not the original llama.cpp.
- segmondy 1y ago
  then don't. the point of open source is not to earn money or profit. it's to have the software open so people can inspect it, be inspired by it, trust it, modify it without contacting you and possibly copy it. imagine sharing your idea with the world but not wanting anyone to implement or capitalize on it. it's an impossible ask. i'm a bald head grey beard, at least in the 90's when we shared software it was for the reasons we outlined, there was no github stars, there was no trying to line a job. it was a true gift and pay it forward sort of thing to the world. it's been almost lost due to money, if you need to earn a living, start a business, get a job and make your open source project a hobby. don't mix them together.
  - behnamoh 1y ago
    > at least in the 90's when we shared software it was for the reasons we outlined... With all due respect, that's not how most open source software is today [1]. A lot of CS students on the job market need Github stars or green tiles in case the employers check their page. So many open source projects are done only to boost resumes, not for the reasons you mentioned. Not to mention a lot of projects start as open source to lure users, only to become closed at some point (the notorious langchain is one example). [1]: with the exception of some huge projects like ffmpeg, llama.cpp, etc.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- freedomben 1y ago
  > This is why I don't like open sourcing my projects anymore. Someone else with more resources just forks it and makes profits, thinking that merely acknowledging me pays my bills. Then I would submit that you are picking the wrong license. The whole point of the GPL/AGPL family of licenses is to ensure that they can't just do this. They will be required to publish their changes, which benefits the original project (you). It's not a perfect solution, but it helps a great deal. The answer to this problem is not to close up and/or go proprietary.
helloplanets 1y ago
Well that tidbit of information was definitely sweeped under the rug. Strikes me as a weird combo to have a fork of a VS Code/JetBrains extension be a completely walled off enterprise only deal. Any other apps out there having success with this sort of model?

tensor 1y ago

Interesting. So if you just configure continue with Mistral Medium 3 as the chat model and codestral as the autocomplete, you probably have exactly this. This is the setup I already use.

speerer 1y ago
If that were the case, then the posted URL would be pure hype. I think it's more likely that they've developed something that is more bespoke than that. It's totally too hard to say though.
- tensor 1y ago
  Knowing the enterprise space, my guess is that the only real changes are hardcoding continue to use only Mistral, and tying it into some sort of central enterprise licensing service. Holding back some novel models just for enterprise use seems unlikely, as does developing some novel agentic capabilities within Continue. Enterprise deals are usually around compliance and security primarily. Companies want centralized billing and to be sure that their developers only use "sanctioned" AI and other tech. Who knows though with that contact us sales wall.
ttoinou 1y ago
Interesting, why do you use those models ? They feel inferior
- tensor 1y ago
  Originally as an experiment in using non-US services, as my company is not a US company and the possibility of tariffs on digital services is not at all unrealistic. The exercise was really enlightening. Not to derail the conversation the TLDR was that in some areas it was easy to move off US services, while in others (github) there are almost no alternatives. I do have access to US models via Kagi to play around with and use for things Mistral doesn't work on. I've been meaning to try command a too, but haven't gotten around to it. I will say that the new mistral medium model is surprisingly good, though I've only just started using it. Codestral is definitely behind other models.
  - ttoinou 1y ago
    What feature of github is lacking in competetitors ? I wouldnt use an AI LLM that has 50% of chance of me needing to reprompt or try another model, I prefer using direclty the best model directly. But yeah US vs. Europe is a real concern
killerstorm 1y ago
The page suggests it's possible to fine-tune models on your code base
- tensor 1y ago
  That's very possible. You can already do that via the platform api easily (just feeding it your github project), so a light UI around that api would be very easy.

behnamoh 1y ago

This is why I don't like open sourcing my projects anymore. Someone else with more resources just forks it and makes profits, thinking that merely acknowledging me pays my bills. For years, ollama didn't acknowledge llama.cpp and r/localllama found it weird until they finally mentioned llama.cpp on their page, but the damage is done: most apps that support local LLMs only support ollama or LM Studio API, not the original llama.cpp.

segmondy 1y ago
then don't. the point of open source is not to earn money or profit. it's to have the software open so people can inspect it, be inspired by it, trust it, modify it without contacting you and possibly copy it. imagine sharing your idea with the world but not wanting anyone to implement or capitalize on it. it's an impossible ask. i'm a bald head grey beard, at least in the 90's when we shared software it was for the reasons we outlined, there was no github stars, there was no trying to line a job. it was a true gift and pay it forward sort of thing to the world. it's been almost lost due to money, if you need to earn a living, start a business, get a job and make your open source project a hobby. don't mix them together.
- behnamoh 1y ago
  > at least in the 90's when we shared software it was for the reasons we outlined... With all due respect, that's not how most open source software is today [1]. A lot of CS students on the job market need Github stars or green tiles in case the employers check their page. So many open source projects are done only to boost resumes, not for the reasons you mentioned. Not to mention a lot of projects start as open source to lure users, only to become closed at some point (the notorious langchain is one example). [1]: with the exception of some huge projects like ffmpeg, llama.cpp, etc.
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
freedomben 1y ago
> This is why I don't like open sourcing my projects anymore. Someone else with more resources just forks it and makes profits, thinking that merely acknowledging me pays my bills. Then I would submit that you are picking the wrong license. The whole point of the GPL/AGPL family of licenses is to ensure that they can't just do this. They will be required to publish their changes, which benefits the original project (you). It's not a perfect solution, but it helps a great deal. The answer to this problem is not to close up and/or go proprietary.

helloplanets 1y ago

Well that tidbit of information was definitely sweeped under the rug. Strikes me as a weird combo to have a fork of a VS Code/JetBrains extension be a completely walled off enterprise only deal. Any other apps out there having success with this sort of model?