Skip to content

Remote evals#14

Merged
parkerhendo merged 9 commits intomainfrom
more-eval-surface-area
Feb 25, 2026
Merged

Remote evals#14
parkerhendo merged 9 commits intomainfrom
more-eval-surface-area

Conversation

@ankrgyl
Copy link
Contributor

@ankrgyl ankrgyl commented Feb 12, 2026

No description provided.

@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Feb 12, 2026

Latest downloadable build artifacts for this PR commit 57bda59fb956:

Available artifact names
  • ``cargo-dist-cache
  • ``artifacts-plan-dist-manifest
  • ``artifacts-build-local-aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu
  • ``artifacts-build-local-x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
  • ``artifacts-build-local-aarch64-apple-darwin
  • ``artifacts-build-local-x86_64-pc-windows-msvc
  • ``artifacts-build-local-x86_64-apple-darwin
  • ``artifacts-build-global

Copy link

@nselvidge nselvidge left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'm not too bullish on moving off of --dev, bringing that up as a discussion point here. I do think we should fix the org check logic though if I'm reading it correctly.

Comment on lines +243 to +251
pub dev: bool,

/// Host interface for eval dev server.
#[arg(long, default_value = "localhost")]
pub dev_host: String,

/// Port for eval dev server.
#[arg(long, default_value_t = 8300)]
pub dev_port: u16,

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I know that the current cli all use --dev but imo it isn't clear why we would call this a "dev server". imo using --serve seems more intuitive. maybe porting to a new CLI is an opportunity to clarify this?

we don't refer to this as a "dev server" anywhere except for the cli flag name.

@parkerhendo parkerhendo merged commit 97fd808 into main Feb 25, 2026
24 checks passed
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.

3 participants