-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 38
Updating all model used to be the 2.5 ones. #90
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
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
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.
Summary of Changes
Hello @Giom-V, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!
I've updated all instances of older Gemini model versions to their newer 2.5 counterparts across the Go, Java, JavaScript, and Python codebases. This ensures that our examples and tests are utilizing the most current and optimized models available, reflecting the latest advancements in the Gemini family. The change is primarily a find-and-replace operation for model names, aiming to keep our code aligned with the latest API specifications.
Highlights
- Model Version Upgrade: The primary change in this pull request is the comprehensive update of model names used in various code examples and tests. This ensures that the examples leverage the latest available model versions.
- Cross-Language Consistency: The model name updates are applied consistently across multiple programming languages, including Go, Java, JavaScript, and Python, demonstrating broad compatibility and maintenance.
- Specific Model Mappings: Specifically, instances of 'gemini-2.0-flash' and 'gemini-1.5-flash-001' have been upgraded to 'gemini-2.5-flash', while 'gemini-2.0-pro-exp-02-05' has been updated to 'gemini-2.5-pro'.
Using Gemini Code Assist
The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.
Invoking Gemini
You can request assistance from Gemini at any point in your pull request via creating an issue comment (i.e. comment on the pull request page) using either /gemini <command>
or @gemini-code-assist <command>
. Below is a summary of the supported commands.
Feature | Command | Description |
---|---|---|
Code Review | /gemini review |
Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state. |
Pull Request Summary | /gemini summary |
Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state. |
Comment | @gemini-code-assist | Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in issue comments and review comments. |
Help | /gemini help |
Displays a list of available commands. |
Customization
To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/
folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.
Limitations & Feedback
Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments or fill out our survey to provide feedback.
You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.
Footnotes
-
Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩
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.
Code Review
This pull request updates the model names across the repository to the newer 2.5
versions. The changes are straightforward and align with the goal of the PR. My review focuses on improving maintainability by addressing the widespread use of hardcoded model name strings. I've added comments in each affected file suggesting the use of constants. This will make future updates easier and reduce the risk of inconsistencies.
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.
Thanks for updating these!
No description provided.