Feature proposal: gto show
settings controlled by .gto
config
#428
Labels
stages
Stages mechanics and how they work
gto show
settings controlled by .gto
config
#428
One of the most powerful features of GTO is the ability to audit model lifecycle and have its history tightly coupled with your git repository.
But the result of GTO is in a sense not completely immutable right now since changing the parameters of
gto show
can lead to different interpretations of the model lifecycle history.In studio we only allow the default now and most users will probably use that but I think it would be good if we allowed users to make the default explicit and also to be able to switch to a non-default (with potentially multiple models per stage) and make it explicit.
The use-case is probably best illustrated with the following two images:
Both show a simple git history with two model versions. In the default GTO settings they produce the same history as in the following picture, but in the non-default only the second one corresponds to this history.
This creates some uncertainty in auditing. What did the author of the repository intend? In an organization I might want to make sure everyone follows the same standard.
So I propose to have
gto show
first check.gto
for settings. Then you can make it explicit to everyone which setup is used. If nothing is specified in.gto
I would still fall back to the current default. If you specify parameters manually when runninggto show
then the.gto
config would be ignored. But in case you are doing an audit and want to really make sure things are done in a standardized way, you would be able to not just specify standard stages in.gto
but also a standard "model registry mode".At the same time I think the default is reasonable enough and most people won't even know about there being alternatives so I think this is a nice to have feature. Still, if you think it is not a waste of time I would try take it and create a contribution (although a slow moving one probably, given the relatively low priority)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: