Mark system_prompt config as not usable #2013
Conversation
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #2013 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 96.95% 93.45% -3.51%
==========================================
Files 69 69
Lines 2891 2886 -5
==========================================
- Hits 2803 2697 -106
- Misses 88 189 +101
|
|
@onmete: The following test failed, say
Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository. I understand the commands that are listed here. |
| @@ -995,6 +995,13 @@ def __init__( | |||
| self.user_data_collection = UserDataCollection( | |||
| **data.get("user_data_collection", {}) | |||
| ) | |||
|
|
|||
| if self.system_prompt is not None: | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Probably I missed discussion around this.. But if it is not used, should not we just remove this ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It is needed for upstream.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
As this is part of yaml config (one time setup done by admin) even in upstream, I am not sure why only file can not be used..
Example:
We set api key through a file.. we don't use a property to provide key directly..
I know prompt & keys are not exactly same in terms of security concern but just for comparison..
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@onmete hmm I was thinking about making it object attribute instead of class attribute. Would it be more clear then?
Description
Mark system_prompt config as not usable
Type of change