https://docs.all-hands.dev/ logo
Join Slack
Powered by
Small ergonomics improvement, tell the agent where...
# proj-agent
l
Small ergonomics improvement, tell the agent where to find previous conversations: github.com/OpenHands/software-agent-sdk/pull/4527
c
This is very curious
From what I see, the reviewer agent flagged that the persistence directory was incorrect, and you agreed and fixed it to a workspace directory. But if it was wrong, how did it work for you initially? On another note, just today I happened to ask the Slack automation bot to look up a detail from a previous conversation, and it found it
l
Haha, my “fix review comments” automation agreed, not me. I need to make that disclose that it’s an automated post
😅 1
c
Completely agree with giving the agent the information, though 🤔 I think maybe the right persistence dir is 
OH_PERSISTENCE_DIR
if set, in 
$HOME
if unset… I wonder what’s up when in docker, though, maybe that’s where 
workspace/conversations
comes from
l
But the reason why it worked was because it was in ~/.openhands
c
via canvas, local?
We have just now a PR fixing a bit of a mess here, … just a sec
l
local canvas
Ah, we should fix that. I guess @modern-fireman-99755 requested changes though
c
Yes, it’s now on the last meters, there are just some cleanups/nits remaining
So I guess we should tell the agent… the value returned by the new utility function (which considers the env var and ~/.openhands ); for now IMHO we could also go with only ~/.openhands if you want
(it's funny that Vasco’s VM agent did know, but maybe it searched everywhere because I gave it a hash id 😅 )
Please note, right now when you asked for review, it’s set to “workspace/conversations”, which as you said it’s not accurate at least on canvas/local
m
Approved
@calm-artist-7206 ah ok you are saying we should adjust that with respect of the env where the agent is working?
c
It was tested on 
~/.openhands
and it worked, but the PR has now 
workspace/conversations
Yes
m
And this should use the solution of the above pr, right?
c
Yes
It's solving exactly this 😅
On a side note, this might be an example of Reviewer Agent approving too easily… though it’s a bit tricky, technically I understand why the LLM thought so…
2 Views
Open in Slack
PreviousNext
Powered by