Repository navigation
RFC 014: Environment Services (design only) - #1508
Open
burtenshaw wants to merge 10 commits into
Open
burtenshaw wants to merge 10 commits into
burtenshaw wants to merge 10 commits into
Conversation
RFC-only extraction from original commit 637310b in openenv#1500.
RFC-only extraction from original commit a77ae5e in openenv#1500.
RFC-only extraction from original commit 0bd7991 in openenv#1500.
…tall CPU-only torch in its evaluator RFC-only extraction from original commit 434cbbd in openenv#1500.
RFC-only extraction from original commit c32dbb2 in openenv#1500.
RFC-only extraction from original commit 60ca411 in openenv#1500.
RFC-only extraction from original commit 0dda477 in openenv#1500.
RFC-only extraction from original commit 073ebcd in openenv#1500.
…view notes Ending an episode on the WebSocket path waited for HF Jobs to confirm cancels on the shared event loop. Run it in a thread instead. The evaluator now rejects checkpoints with unexpected keys, and RFC 014 links to openenv/OpenEnv and describes trainer staleness without naming one framework. RFC-only extraction from original commit eb21148 in openenv#1500.
6 tasks done
This branch has not been deployed
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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Summary
Separates @rycerzes's RFC 014 design from the experimental implementation in #1500, as requested in #1500 (review). Discussion and origin: #1382.
The nine original RFC revisions are replayed with their author/date preserved and original commit SHAs recorded in each commit. The author credit and prototype results remain. The prototype link points to #1500.
Adds the proposed submit/inspect/cancel/logs/price/artifacts provider contract. A second backend and native no-network support are prerequisites before step 2; Docker and Modal remain proposals. Core manifest types and reserved jobs_ names are deferred. Unscored None rewards depend on RFC 013 acceptance and its final semantics. Examples use step(CallToolAction(...)); direct-MCP episode enforcement is tracked in #1507.
Evidence
After: diff against main contains exactly the two RFC files; example executed with fake HF Jobs through server serialization/client parsing and returned final reward/spend. No paid jobs.
os.killpgPermissionError during the full run, but passed in isolation on main; the Harbor occupied-port test failed identically on main (expected "already in use", observed startup timeout). These results do not establish a regression from this change. Full lint has 47 pre-existing main formatting findings plus the two known usort files; changed files pass. The test hook itself lackstimeouton this host, so the same pytest selection ran directly. CI was pending at the post-push check; no monitoring requested. Repository formatting has existing failures on main; no Python or runtime files change here.Merge Danger
Door: two-way
Documentation only; this PR does not mark the RFC accepted or adopt core APIs.
Blast Radius: design
Provider contract, second-backend validation and RFC 013 semantics remain review decisions.