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

[Bug]: When attempting to use 'skip_until_dev_step' or just 'step' β†’ No change. 😒 [Bug]: #925

Open
xzunknownzx opened this issue May 15, 2024 · 2 comments
Labels
bug Something isn't working

Comments

@xzunknownzx
Copy link

xzunknownzx commented May 15, 2024

Version

Command-line (Python) version

Operating System

Windows 10

What happened?

Description

Both commands below fail to show any difference and do not start at the step given as an argument. I looked through the database that the pilot uses, and it contains every single piece of output and input, steps, etc., in a nicely formatted pack of data. I'm confused as to why it is not working, or rather if I am misunderstanding the use of them, what is the function of these/why is what I thought it to be not a feature?

It would be beyond helpful if the database could simply move the steps that follow the step argument given in the initiation/resume to a separate table. This would allow for an alternate route if you want to revert to the now redacted steps and start anew from that step in the argument.

Either way, I'm super grateful for this project. It has helped me immensely, and I am thankful to everyone who put so much time and effort into making this amazing. ❀️

Commands Executed

C:\Users\12166\Desktop\gpt-pilot-main\pilot>python main.py app_id=27fa92f1-cbe2-4925-882d-e927770ff76d **step=1151**
C:\Users\12166\Desktop\gpt-pilot-main\pilot>python main.py app_id=27fa92f1-cbe2-4925-882d-e927770ff76d **skip_until_dev_step=1151**

Expected Behavior

↓ When using: ↓
step=1151
skip_until_dev_step=1151
β†’ β†’ The project should start at the specified step given in the argument. (...I think, hopefully?)

Actual Output

Note the bolded step arguments:

------------------ LOADING PROJECT ----------------------
ExApp(app_id=27fa92f1-cbe2-4925-882d-e927770ff76d)
--------------------------------------------------------------

START

? Did you make any changes to "ExApp" project files since last time you used Pythagora? no

βœ…  Project_description
βœ…  Architecture
βœ…  Environment_setup
βœ…  Development_planning

Starting development...
Implementing task #4:  Implement real-time blah blah blah.

Starting task #4 implementation...
{
    "relevant_files": [
        "./server.js",
        "./public/js/socket.js"
    ]
}
Saving file C:\Users\12166\Desktop\gpt-pilot-main\workspace\ExApp\.env
Saving file C:\Users\12166\Desktop\gpt-pilot-main\workspace\ExApp\package.json
Saving file C:\Users\12166\Desktop\gpt-pilot-main\workspace\ExApp\server.js
// many more

**Dev step 1156**

Additional Information

  • Notice that despite input of "step=1151" and "skip_until_dev_step=1151", Pilot started at "Dev step 1156".
  • Each iteration that I try again, it begins one more step advanced from the previous start.
  • OS: Windows 10
  • Python Version: 3.8.5
  • Database: SQLite
@xzunknownzx xzunknownzx added the bug Something isn't working label May 15, 2024
@xzunknownzx
Copy link
Author

Additionally, a way to interrupt current execution as it stands, with custom commands to roll back a step, or multiple, or edit the current task if Pilot is moving off course, would be double amazing.

@techjeylabs techjeylabs changed the title When attempting to use 'skip_until_dev_step' or just 'step' β†’ No change. 😒 [Bug]: [Bug]: When attempting to use 'skip_until_dev_step' or just 'step' β†’ No change. 😒 [Bug]: May 15, 2024
@RRitika123
Copy link

Hi, I too experienced the same issue between I wanted to know how did you access the database. Your input would be really helpful.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug Something isn't working
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants