Skip to content
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

[DO NOT MERGE] feat(vertexai): Add support for setting the API version - wait for the release date #17000

Closed
wants to merge 3 commits into from

Conversation

andrewheard
Copy link

Description

WIP - See go/firebase-vertex-set-api-version (Google-internal only) for more details.

Added the ability to specify an API version (e.g., v1 or v1beta) when initializing a GenerativeModel using a new RequestOptions class to match the other SDKs. This is the Flutter/Dart equivalent of firebase/firebase-ios-sdk#14356.

Breaking Change

Does your PR require plugin users to manually update their apps to accommodate your change?

  • Yes, this is a breaking change.
  • No, this is not a breaking change.

TODOs

  • API review and approval
  • Add unit tests
  • Update the default API version to v1 when the backend is ready
  • Add a CHANGELOG entry

Copy link
Author

@andrewheard andrewheard left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks for taking a look, @cynthiajoan!

@cynthiajoan cynthiajoan changed the title feat(vertexai): Add support for setting the API version [DO NOT MERGE] feat(vertexai): Add support for setting the API version - wait for the release date Jan 24, 2025
final String versionIdentifier;

@override
String toString() => name;
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Should this be versionIdentifier for better clarity?

Copy link
Member

@russellwheatley russellwheatley left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think this will conflict with Imagen PR: #16976 (review)

Might be easier to base off that branch, other than that, LGTM.

@andrewheard
Copy link
Author

Closing this PR for now since it no longer needs to go out at the same time as (or before) Imagen. We're also considering not exposing it in the public API anymore. Will bring it back and rebase when the time comes.

@andrewheard andrewheard closed this Feb 5, 2025
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.

4 participants