Repository navigation
chore: drop make install - #46
Conversation
- `make install` was advertised in `make help`, the README and the Rust-import error but never existed. Drop it rather than add it: from source the package is just `pip install .`, and in a checkout `make dev` is the fix. - README: a Quick Start that builds both halves and runs a command on one machine, then Installation, then Usage (direct and tunnel mode). - Call the Python side the "server" everywhere, matching `Server` and `--server-url`; there is no separate controller program since InftyAI#42. - Fix the install.sh version-pin example (v0.1.0 does not exist). Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Signed-off-by: kerthcet <kerthcet@gmail.com>
Bump protocol, server, daemon and the Python package to 0.2.0, along with the sandd-protocol dependency pin and Cargo.lock. Point the docs and the release Dockerfiles at v0.2.0. Their defaults were broken: Dockerfile.daemon-tunnel-release pinned v0.1.0, which was never released, and Dockerfile.server-tunnel-release pinned PyPI 0.0.0. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Signed-off-by: kerthcet <kerthcet@gmail.com>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Copilot was unable to review this pull request because the user who requested the review has reached their quota limit.
An organization owner can choose the repository organization as the billing source for reviews requested by members with a paid Copilot license. Learn about Copilot code review billing. Review the Copilot code review billing settings.
|
Important
This repository does not receive automatic reviews because it has fewer than 10 stars. ⚙️ Run configuration
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
|
/kind cleanup |
InftyAI-Agent
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Approved: PR has both lgtm and approved labels
What this PR does / why we need it
Which issue(s) this PR fixes
Fixes #
Special notes for your reviewer
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?