chat-cli: renamed and added Ollama support

I have added support for Ollama to my chat-cli tool (formerly named cli-chatgpt, see previous posts). Ollama is a very easy way to run llama2 locally; it runs a local HTTP server and this will be used.

Depending on whether an OpenAI key or Ollama are available, the models will be made available and you can see this in cgt -h. (Using cgt as a command here is based on my recommendation of using an alias in your shell.)

When you’re offline, OpenAI is deemed unavailable, thus–if it is installed and active–Ollama/llama2 will be used automatically. While it currently doesn’t switch between models during a conversation (because of your online state), you can simply exit and re-continue the conversation with another model using cgt -l.

Both models show their responses in a streaming way.

❯ cgt where is gerolstein
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo
> where is gerolstein

Gerolstein is a town in the Bitburg-Prüm district in Rhineland-Palatinate, Germany. It is located in the Eifel mountain range, approximately 15 kilometers southeast of Bitburg.
> ^c

### Went offline here.
❯ cgt where is gerolstein
Model: llama2:latest
> where is gerolstein

 Gerolstein is a town located in the state of Rhineland-Palatinate, Germany. It is situated in the northern part of the state, approximately 20 kilometers (12 miles) northwest of the city of Mainz. The exact address of Gerolstein is:

Gerolstein, Germany

If you are planning to visit Gerolstein or need more detailed information, please let me know and I will be happy to help.
> 

While there is no config available, you can change the priority of models in the source.

New Unit Tests Need to Fail (Running the Old Code)

When possible, I very much recommend adding unit tests to a Pull Request when you fix something as a way to prevent that it breaks again in future. This is no news.

One important step of adding that unit test, though, is to make sure it actually tests the bug you are fixing. Specifically, this means that you need to test that fact like this:

Keep the new unit test, undo the other code changes. The unit test now needs to fail.

If your newly introduced unit test still passes, then you didn’t expose the bug in the test. A simple check but often neglected.

A tooling solution

Here is how you can automatically test this in Github. I have created a sample repo with 3 pull requests https://github.com/akirk/unit-test-failure/pulls:

3 Pull requests of which one fails the unit tests

You can see the first one failed:

A screenshot of a Github Action that has a unit test passing when it shouldn't

The problem is that the old code already passes the new tests. This means the tests don’t test the change.

The second one passes but only because no new tests were added at all.

A screenshot of a Github Action that skipps testing without the unit test changes because no new unit test was added

And the third one does it correctly. The old code fails the new tests as desired:

A screenshot of a Github Action that has correctly fails the unit test when running the old code

Here is the code for the Github Action to test this:

name: Pull Request Unit Test Validation

on:
  pull_request:
    types:
      - opened
      - synchronize

jobs:
  test-changes:
    runs-on: ubuntu-latest

    steps:
      - name: Checkout code
        uses: actions/checkout@v2

      - name: Set up Python
        uses: actions/setup-python@v2
        with:
          python-version: 3.9

      - name: Run unit tests with changes
        run: python -m unittest discover -s tests

  test-without-changes:
    needs: test-changes
    runs-on: ubuntu-latest
    if: ${{ github.event_name == 'pull_request' }}

    steps:
      - name: PR commits + 1
        run: echo "PR_FETCH_DEPTH=$(( ${{ github.event.pull_request.commits }} + 1 ))" >> "${GITHUB_ENV}"

      - name: Checkout PR branch and all PR commits
        uses: actions/checkout@v3
        with:
          ref: ${{ github.event.pull_request.head.sha }}
          fetch-depth: ${{ env.PR_FETCH_DEPTH }}

      - name: Set up Python
        uses: actions/setup-python@v2
        with:
          python-version: 3.9

      - name: 'Fetch the other branch with enough history for a common merge-base commit'
        run: git fetch origin ${{ github.event.pull_request.base.ref }}

      - name: Check if tests were changed
        run: |
          git restore --source=$(git merge-base origin/${{ github.event.pull_request.base.ref }} HEAD) --worktree tests/
          if git diff --quiet; then
            echo "TESTS_CHANGED=0" >> "${GITHUB_ENV}"
          else
            echo "TESTS_CHANGED=1" >> "${GITHUB_ENV}"
          fi
          git restore .

      - name: Revert code changes (excluding tests)
        run: git restore --source=$(git merge-base origin/${{ github.event.pull_request.base.ref }} HEAD) --worktree :^tests/
        if: ${{ env.TESTS_CHANGED }} == '1'

      - name: Run unit tests without changes
        run: |
          if [[ ${{ env.TESTS_CHANGED }} -eq 0 ]]; then
            echo "No unit test changes detected, skipping"
            exit 0
          fi

          if python -m unittest discover -s tests; then
            echo "Unit test should not pass"
            exit 1
          else
            echo "Unit test failed as expected"
          fi

Thanks @jesusamieiro-com for pointing out that you need to be careful with this for code that adds new test coverage. Probably best to use a Github label to activate or deactivate this action.