Skip to content

Conversation

@caozhuozi
Copy link
Contributor

Description

See #105

Related Issue

#105

Motivation and Context

See #105 for details

Copy link
Contributor

@gemini-code-assist gemini-code-assist bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Summary of Changes

Hello @caozhuozi, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

I've removed the dedicated "embedding" boolean field from the model configuration. This change streamlines the configuration by shifting the representation of embedding capabilities from a simple boolean flag to a more explicit and flexible approach using the "EmbeddingModality" constant, which now clarifies how models can process or generate embeddings through their input and output types. This aligns the configuration with a more nuanced understanding of model capabilities.

Highlights

  • Configuration Schema Update: The "embedding" boolean field has been removed from the "ModelCapabilities" struct in the Go configuration specification.
  • Documentation Alignment: The "docs/config.md" file has been updated to reflect this change, removing the "embedding" field from both the definition and the example configuration.
  • Modality Clarification: A detailed comment has been added to the "EmbeddingModality" constant in "specs-go/v1/config.go", explaining its role in indicating whether a model can process or generate embeddings via input/output types.
Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point in your pull request via creating an issue comment (i.e. comment on the pull request page) using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands.

Feature Command Description
Code Review /gemini review Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary /gemini summary Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment @gemini-code-assist Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in issue comments and review comments.
Help /gemini help Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments or fill out our survey to provide feedback.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

  1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution.

Copy link
Contributor

@gemini-code-assist gemini-code-assist bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Code Review

This pull request correctly removes the deprecated embedding boolean field from the model configuration, replacing it with an embedding modality. The changes are applied consistently to the Go type definitions and the documentation. My main feedback is that the explanation for the new embedding modality, which has been added as a comment to the Go code, should be moved to the user-facing documentation in docs/config.md to ensure it's easily discoverable by users of the specification. I've added a specific comment with this suggestion.

Comment on lines +106 to +124
@@ -124,9 +129,6 @@
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

medium

This comment is excellent and clearly explains how to use the embedding modality. However, as this is user-facing documentation for the specification, it should be in docs/config.md. This would make it more discoverable for users of the spec. Please move this explanation to the inputTypes/outputTypes section in docs/config.md.

@caozhuozi caozhuozi force-pushed the clarify-embedding branch 3 times, most recently from 90b0016 to d042395 Compare July 31, 2025 11:09
@bergwolf bergwolf added the enhancement New feature or request label Jul 31, 2025
@bergwolf
Copy link
Member

@aftersnow wdyt?

@aftersnow
Copy link
Contributor

@aftersnow wdyt?

Yes, since EmbeddingModality is included in OutputTypes, then Embedding *bool is redundant. @caozhuozi Can you also add 'embedding' value to the doc? https://github.com/modelpack/model-spec/blob/main/docs/config.md?plain=1#L156

@caozhuozi
Copy link
Contributor Author

@aftersnow PTAL.

Copy link
Member

@bergwolf bergwolf left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@caozhuozi There is a merge conflict. Otherwise lgtm.

@caozhuozi
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thank you! Let me resolve it.

@caozhuozi
Copy link
Contributor Author

@bergwolf the confict should be resolved. PTAL ❤️.

Copy link
Member

@bergwolf bergwolf left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

lgtm, thanks!

Copy link
Contributor

@aftersnow aftersnow left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

lgtm

@aftersnow aftersnow merged commit 498b2bd into modelpack:main Aug 27, 2025
3 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

enhancement New feature or request

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants