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

Accuracy benchmarks and official QA process? #17

Open
benhalpern opened this issue Dec 30, 2024 · 2 comments
Open

Accuracy benchmarks and official QA process? #17

benhalpern opened this issue Dec 30, 2024 · 2 comments

Comments

@benhalpern
Copy link
Contributor

I don't think this is an immediate concern, but once there is some momentum in the community I think it could make sense to have an official process and recommendation for verifying improvements and regressions?

I'm thinking something along the lines

  1. Automated testing against a static stash of images with known outcomes
  2. Manual QA testing checklist instructions for IRL swing testing accompanied by non-interfering third-party LMs
  3. Automated performance benchmarks

I imagine this could create a powerful feedback loop for community QA contribution if the process is laid out in an easy-to-follow formula.

@jamespilgrim
Copy link
Owner

jamespilgrim commented Jan 1, 2025 via email

@jeshernandez
Copy link
Contributor

I can help setting up some jobs, unit test validation, pre-build, etc. I just need to know if we're using [ubuntu-latest] as the runner? Also, permissions to run jobs (read only)? I pay around $4 (per seat) for a team license and able to use 3,000 minutes of Action runners.

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

No branches or pull requests

3 participants