5 comments

  • freshtake a minute ago

    First off, cool project! It's always great to see derivatives that question the efficiency of the established product.

    I think the main thing the readme is missing is the core benefits. Reducing LOC and dependencies is cool, but it would be great to understand if this provides some additional benefits like lower latency or memory requirements.

  • Centigonal 41 minutes ago

    This is a cool project, and the idea of using LLMs to selectively extract features from open source projects is an interesting concept.

    The only thing I take issue with is the phrase "LiteLLM Without the Bloat." A lot of the features that have been removed (like cost tracking, streaming, caching) are... kind of the core value proposition of LiteLLM for many of their users.

      OutOfHere 17 minutes ago

      Fine, but then LiteLLM doesn't quite live up to its name, does it? With all those features, there is nothing "lite" about it. It is essential for a project to live up to its name.

      Imagine Sqlite adding heavy features from Postgresql.

  • khalic 41 minutes ago

    I strongly recommend the authors rewrite the readme by hand. It’s kind of a snif test for how much care someone out into this project.

      devinpadron 28 minutes ago

      Agree. The LLM'isms are offputting.