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 6 hours ago | parent [-]

LiteLLM doesn't quite live up to its name. 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, e.g. row-level security.

▲

datadrivenangel 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

LiteLLM's problem isn't really features, it's how bloated all the features are, and specifically how AI maximalist and janky their dev practices are.

▲

yujonglee 2 hours ago | parent [-]

thanks for the feedback. genuinely curious what you think we could be doing better, especially around our dev practices. Would love to hear specifics.

	▲	OutOfHere an hour ago \| parent [-]
		Didn't yall have a release of a package that stole user keys or such?

▲

mpyne 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

We run it at my org and it's never been a noticeable resource hog. It's actually the best performer between it, our AI observability stack and the front end.

▲

sv123 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

But imagine Sqlite not supporting joins or window functions... sure they are useful but look how many LOC it adds! Who is the arbiter of what Lite actually means?