Replies: 7 comments 3 replies
|
I implemented an ACP-based OpenCode 2 provider on a branch It keeps OpenCode V1 unchanged and adds I have tested that it works locally with The change is big (2,949 additions and 17 deletions) because it touches the provider adapter and lifecycle tests. I have not created a PR as it is 1000+ lines and contributions are paused. I planned with Sol, implemented with Luna and then got some back and forth reviews with Sol. I chose ACP over SDK because T3 Code already has a shared ACP runtime for Cursor and Grok, allowing the OpenCode V1 SDK integration to remain untouched. Provider health and authentication
Model discovery and working conversation
|
|
Nice 1️⃣! |
|
This is awesome, I can't wait to have this in T3Code, really want to use OpenCode 2 through T3Code |
|
With opencode2 being the new default +1 from me |
|
It feels like this is now an issue rather than an idea, knowing v2 is the default. |
|
Agreeing with the comments above, this now qualifies as an issue @juliusmarminge |
|
#12643 seems to be v2 support in work |
|
Nice 1 |
|
finally |
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Before submitting
Area
apps/server
Problem or use case
I want to use opencode2 with t3code
Proposed solution
Add another provider for opencode2 in settings providers, will be easier to switch to opencode2 when it goes stable in a couple of weeks.
Why this matters
Users that have opencode2 can’t use t3 code.
Smallest useful scope
Add a toggle in current opencode providers for v1 /v2
Alternatives considered
I tried switching binary path to v2 but that didn’t work. I get the error:
Risks or tradeoffs
No response
Examples or references
No response
Contribution
All reactions