Skip to content

okp integration proposal#2914

Open
blublinsky wants to merge 1 commit into
openshift:mainfrom
blublinsky:okp-integration
Open

okp integration proposal#2914
blublinsky wants to merge 1 commit into
openshift:mainfrom
blublinsky:okp-integration

Conversation

@blublinsky
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Description

This PR provides an OKP integration proposal

Type of change

  • Refactor
  • New feature
  • Bug fix
  • CVE fix
  • Optimization
  • Documentation Update
  • Configuration Update
  • Bump-up dependent library
  • Bump-up library or tool used for development (does not change the final image)
  • CI configuration change
  • Konflux configuration change

Related Tickets & Documents

Checklist before requesting a review

  • I have performed a self-review of my code.
  • PR has passed all pre-merge test jobs.
  • If it is a core feature, I have added thorough tests.

Testing

  • Please provide detailed steps to perform tests related to this code change.
  • How were the fix/results from this change verified? Please provide relevant screenshots or results.

@openshift-ci openshift-ci Bot requested review from bparees and tisnik May 1, 2026 08:03
@openshift-ci
Copy link
Copy Markdown

openshift-ci Bot commented May 1, 2026

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by:
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please assign joshuawilson for approval. For more information see the Code Review Process.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Details Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@openshift-ci
Copy link
Copy Markdown

openshift-ci Bot commented May 1, 2026

@blublinsky: all tests passed!

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard.

Details

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository. I understand the commands that are listed here.


- **Native / direct RAG** — The application loads or hosts retrieval itself (e.g. in-process vector store, embedded FAISS, fixed corpus on disk). Retrieval is not exposed to the model as an MCP tool unless you explicitly wrap it.
- **MCP-based RAG** — Documentation or knowledge is retrieved through the **Model Context Protocol**: an MCP server exposes search/read tools; the **model** (or agent runtime) chooses when to call them. The corpus may live remotely; latency and auth follow MCP semantics.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LCORE supports both ways of integrating RAG into request processing flow and calls them inline and tool RAG approaches. Wondering if we could keep the terminology consistent.

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants