Repository navigation
feat(pr-review): add llm-extra-body input for provider-specific request fields #544
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Open
arpit-acceleratedata
wants to merge
3
commits into
OpenHands:main
Choose a base branch
from
accelerate-data:feat/pr-review-llm-extra-body
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
3 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
506d658
feat(pr-review): add llm-extra-body input for provider-specific reque…
arpit-acceleratedata f3373ed
refactor(pr-review): validate LLM_EXTRA_BODY with the other environme…
arpit-acceleratedata e905b50
feat(pr-review): add max-iterations input to bound the review run
arpit-acceleratedata File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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
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
Oops, something went wrong.
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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Direct subscripting makes these two new keys mandatory for every caller of
create_conversation(), not justvalidate_environment().create_conversation()is also called with hand-built config dicts;tests/test_pr_review_review_context.py::test_create_conversation_uses_sdk_project_skill_loader(lines 243-249) omits both keys and now raisesKeyError: 'extra_body'. Running the CI commanduv run --group test pytest tests/on this head gives1 failed, 799 passed, 24 skipped; the same test passes onorigin/main, so this is a regression from this PR.Use the optional-key pattern already used a few lines above (
config.get("use_sub_agents", False)):The same applies to
config["max_iterations"]at line 1147.