The design claimed merging would immediately break dissect. It would
not: dissect keeps running whatever version it already has, and this
release does not touch it. What is true is narrower -- once dissect
moves to 1.0.6, the M2.7 scope will refuse to assemble.
Worth recording because the distinction is not academic here.
dissect/requirements.txt declares polygateway>=1.0.1,<1.1, a range
rather than a pin, so 1.0.6 satisfies it and any routine reinstall picks
it up without anyone deciding to upgrade. So it is not "breaks on
merge", it is "breaks on the next dependency install".
The paragraph now carries both corrections it went through, since a
claim about downstream impact that was wrong twice is worth leaving
visible rather than quietly rewriting.
The thinking matrix had been running inside make ci all along, which is
not what the design claimed. It takes seven minutes, spends 137 real
calls, and its criteria are statistical, so a network hiccup fails the
build for reasons unrelated to the change under test -- one run died on
three consecutive network errors exhausting the source.
The project already has the mechanism for this: the slow marker, which
addopts excludes by default and the config comments describe as "CI runs
it on demand". Marking the matrix slow brings make ci back down from
seven minutes to ninety seconds while the matrix stays a merge
requirement via -m slow.
The design also claimed e2e does not run in CI. It does: make test runs
pytest over tests/, e2e included, and the existing smoke tests really
call the gateway whenever .env has credentials. Only slow-marked tests
are excluded. Both documents now say so.
Version sources are pyproject and __init__; a test enforces they agree,
and it caught the second one being missed.
The verifier caught that the disable-direction evidence only proved "no
regression", not "actually took effect": on M3 the disabled runs and the
no-opinion baseline are identically distributed, because that model does
not reason by default anyway. So the disable runs alone cannot rule out
the very failure mode issue #5 is about -- the parameter being silently
dropped upstream. The bogus-value experiment that does rule it out was
sitting in the findings document instead of the test suite; it is now
case L3b, and the L3 assertion that could never fail is gone.
Also from the review: the e2e helper caught bare Exception, which would
have disguised a library bug as an unavailable source, exactly the
silence the reporting discipline exists to prevent; the unregistered
model warning fired on every request instead of once per source; and the
transport caught ValueError broadly enough to mislabel unrelated errors,
now narrowed to a dedicated ThinkingUnsupportedError.
The design and plan still described the original judgement criteria,
which the measurements had already overturned. Both now match what the
tests actually do, and the design no longer claims the only new failure
surface is the openai one -- dissect configures MiniMax-M2.7 with
ENABLE_THINKING=false and will fail at assembly, which has to be
coordinated before this merges.
Findings: live-API measurements across MiniMax M3/M2.7/M2.5, qwen and
deepseek, plus a survey of how nine unified gateways model per-model
parameter divergence. Key facts: reasoning_effort is MiniMax's real
switch, M2.x reasoning is mandatory and cannot be disabled, and the
relay's local token-count fallback silently drops reasoning_tokens.
Design: keep the parameter shape at provider level, push capability
down to model level, split "unknown" / "unsupported" / "no opinion"
into three distinct values, and fail at assembly time when a model
cannot honour enable_thinking=False.
iomgaa