Skip to content

Remove stream-interval from config in GPT OSS Recipe#194

Open
rnik12 wants to merge 2 commits intovllm-project:mainfrom
rnik12:gptoss-reasoning-content-split-fix
Open

Remove stream-interval from config in GPT OSS Recipe#194
rnik12 wants to merge 2 commits intovllm-project:mainfrom
rnik12:gptoss-reasoning-content-split-fix

Conversation

@rnik12
Copy link

@rnik12 rnik12 commented Jan 11, 2026

stream-interval breaks split between "reasoning_content" and "content"

removing stream-interval from the config restores the split between "reasoning_content" and "content"

stream-interval breaks split between "reasoning_content" and "content"
@gemini-code-assist
Copy link
Contributor

Summary of Changes

Hello @rnik12, 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!

This pull request addresses a configuration problem within the GPT OSS Recipe. By removing a specific stream-interval setting, the system's ability to correctly delineate between 'reasoning_content' and 'content' is restored, ensuring proper content processing and display.

Highlights

  • Configuration Update: The stream-interval configuration parameter has been removed from the GPT OSS Recipe documentation.
  • Bug Fix: This change resolves an issue where the presence of stream-interval was causing an incorrect split between 'reasoning_content' and 'content'.

🧠 New Feature in Public Preview: You can now enable Memory to help Gemini Code Assist learn from your team's feedback. This makes future code reviews more consistent and personalized to your project's style. Click here to enable Memory in your admin console.

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 by creating a comment using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands on the current page.

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 pull request 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. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.

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

  1. 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.

Copy link
Contributor

@gemini-code-assist gemini-code-assist bot left a 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 removes the stream-interval setting from two configuration examples in the GPT-OSS.md guide to fix a content splitting issue. While this is a good fix, the change is incomplete. It introduces inconsistencies as the actual YAML configuration files are not updated, other examples in the same document still use the parameter, and the documentation text still recommends it. My review comment provides details on the required changes to make this PR consistent and complete.

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.

1 participant