Directly recommend setting remote: true when mentioning remote bindings
#25289
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
dario-piotrowicz
requested review from
a team,
GregBrimble,
Oxyjun,
ToriLindsay,
WalshyDev,
aninibread,
celso,
elithrar,
harshil1712,
irvinebroque,
jonesphillip,
joshthoward,
kathayl,
kodster28,
mchenco,
mikenomitch,
rozenmd,
rts-rob,
thomasgauvin and
vy-ton
as code owners
github-actions
bot
added
product:browser-rendering
product:d1
github-actions
bot
assigned
celso,
danielgek,
kathayl,
mchenco,
ToriLindsay,
elithrar,
harshil1712,
joshthoward,
Oxyjun and
rozenmd
Contributor
|
This pull request requires reviews from CODEOWNERS as it changes files that match the following patterns:
|
Contributor
|
This PR requires additional review attention because it affects the following areas: PartialsThis PR updates partial files, which are pieces of content used across multiple files in our Render component.
|
Contributor
| ``` | ||
|
|
||
| You can run this script to test it using [remote bindings](/workers/development-testing/#remote-bindings): | ||
| You can run this script to test it via: |
Member
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Note: I just removed the remote bindings reference here altogether... to be honest I don't fully follow what this guide is doing with workers AI and why it is using the API directly... 🤔
I think it'd be better not to necessarily include the remote bindings mention here now, revisti/re-evalute the guide, potentially update it and then see where and how to include remote bindings
irvinebroque
approved these changes
Sep 23, 2025
Contributor
irvinebroque
left a comment
irvinebroque
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
big thank you for this!
dario-piotrowicz
force-pushed
the
dario/2199-remote-bindings-no-link
branch
from
6fd3f02 to
0abd260
Compare
dario-piotrowicz
force-pushed
the
dario/2199-remote-bindings-no-link
branch
from
0abd260 to
9b9fa1b
Compare
This comment was marked as spam.
This comment was marked as spam.
Sorry, something went wrong.
Oxyjun
approved these changes
Sep 30, 2025
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
13 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This PR is for addressing a concern @irvinebroque raised here: #25256 (review)
The fact that the changes in #25256 required users to navigate to different pages instead of directly getting instructions regarding remote bindings.