Skip to content

Conversation

commit111
Copy link
Contributor

@commit111 commit111 commented May 20, 2025

based off of #234, but with an updated model name for ai/nova-micro

@commit111
Copy link
Contributor Author

commit111 commented May 20, 2025

I previously named it ai/nova-micro, but then I renamed it to us.amazon.nova-micro-v1:0 after discussion with Lio. Since the nova-micro model used for Playground is only available on one cloud, it makes no sense to make a cloud-neutral name for it. @jordanstephens

@commit111 commit111 requested a review from jordanstephens May 20, 2025 22:47
@jordanstephens
Copy link
Member

renamed to us.amazon.nova-micro-v1:0 after discussion with Lio. Since the nova-micro model used for Playground is only available on one cloud, it makes no sense to make a cloud neutral name for it. @jordanstephens

Actually—aren't we about to move playground to GCP? Shouldn't we be documenting a cross-cloud model?

@commit111
Copy link
Contributor Author

renamed to us.amazon.nova-micro-v1:0 after discussion with Lio. Since the nova-micro model used for Playground is only available on one cloud, it makes no sense to make a cloud neutral name for it. @jordanstephens

Actually—aren't we about to move playground to GCP? Shouldn't we be documenting a cross-cloud model?

For now, the playground default is the nova-micro model as we release the sample. I suppose we can update the doc for it when we move to GCP, but it seems clearest to me if we match the specific change in this PR to nova-micro. For the other examples, we can use a cross-cloud model, possibly ai/llama?

Copy link
Member

@jordanstephens jordanstephens left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

renamed to us.amazon.nova-micro-v1:0 after discussion with Lio. Since the nova-micro model used for Playground is only available on one cloud, it makes no sense to make a cloud neutral name for it. @jordanstephens

Actually—aren't we about to move playground to GCP? Shouldn't we be documenting a cross-cloud model?

For now, the playground default is the nova-micro model as we release the sample. I suppose we can update the doc for it when we move to GCP, but it seems clearest to me if we match the specific change in this PR to nova-micro. For the other examples, we can use a cross-cloud model, possibly ai/llama?

I don't think we should be documenting a cloud-specific model for playground given that we are on the cusp of migrating playground from AWS to GCP.

I think we should either document a cloud-neutral model, or wait to document this at all.

@commit111 commit111 requested a review from jordanstephens May 20, 2025 23:48
@commit111
Copy link
Contributor Author

commit111 commented May 20, 2025

I think we should at least update this so that it doesn't give misleading information. Currently, it shows ai/claude-haiku, but this is not the case, and it is also not available on Docker.

So, I added a neutral description instead of mentioning a specific name.

@commit111 commit111 changed the title Use nova micro for LLM Update LLM on plyaground docs May 20, 2025
@commit111 commit111 changed the title Update LLM on plyaground docs Update LLM on playground docs May 20, 2025
Copy link
Member

@jordanstephens jordanstephens left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks Linda

@commit111 commit111 merged commit 1df6e5f into main May 21, 2025
4 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.

2 participants