Skip to content

Conversation

@p1-0tr
Copy link

@p1-0tr p1-0tr commented Jun 10, 2025

I've found being able to lock the llama-server version to be useful at times. If we want to merge this it may make sense to come up with a cleaner solution. LMK what you think.

@p1-0tr p1-0tr requested review from doringeman and xenoscopic June 10, 2025 14:06
Copy link
Contributor

@doringeman doringeman left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Sure! This allows testing new versions before tagging them as latest without any code change!

Copy link
Contributor

@xenoscopic xenoscopic left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This seems super useful to me.

main.go Outdated
llamacpp.ShouldUpdateServerLock.Unlock()
}

desiredSeverVersion, ok := os.LookupEnv("SERVER_VERSION")
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Only minor nit is that maybe we should prefix the environment variable with an engine spec, e.g. LLAMACPP_SERVER_VERSION, for the future where we have multiple backends.

@p1-0tr p1-0tr force-pushed the ps-llama-server-version-lock branch from 00f4925 to f17e7a3 Compare June 11, 2025 14:55
@p1-0tr p1-0tr marked this pull request as ready for review June 11, 2025 14:56
@p1-0tr p1-0tr merged commit 5047eed into main Jun 11, 2025
4 checks passed
@p1-0tr p1-0tr deleted the ps-llama-server-version-lock branch June 11, 2025 14:57
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.

4 participants