fix: remove requirement for toVercelAISDK in agent defaults #910
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
Contributor
|
@launchdarkly/browser size report |
Contributor
Author
|
Closing in favor of removing this method from agents entirely, ticket here: https://launchdarkly.atlassian.net/jira/software/c/projects/REL/boards/239?selectedIssue=REL-9248 |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Requirements
Related issues
Provide links to any issues in this repository or elsewhere relating to this pull request.
Describe the solution you've provided
Removes the requirement for
toVercelAISDKto be specified as part of the Agent defaults. This is not a method that the implementer should have to/would be able to provide.Before - parameter was required on the default type:
After - parameter is no longer required on the type:
Describe alternatives you've considered
This is a bug fix, so there are not alternative approaches
Additional context
Discussed offline with @abarker-launchdarkly , we should move these non-required/decorator methods to a single union for exclusion once we add additional methods that need excluded so that they don't have to be specified in multiple places.