Earlier quoted context omitted.
Tbh I’m (loosely) following commit message best practices in all of my projects out of irrational fear of being viewed as unprofessional. But never needed that effing prose in my workflow. Maybe a keyword from time to time. I’m using code, not messages to navigate history, and in a rare occasion. If all my messages turned into “i” I’d lose nothing, because all rationales and essentials are in code comments. I’d bette…
Commit comments are how you find code diffs. Focus on what/why in your commit messages. If you can’t articulate that in your commit messages, I can almost guarantee you’re thinking deeply enough about your code changes.
Fooocus: OSS for image generation by ControlNet author
21–30 of 59 posts
Re: Fooocus: OSS for image generation by ControlNet author
#22Great steps. I would still like to see something offline that can blend two disparate images into one generated scene, like artbreeder has.
Re: Fooocus: OSS for image generation by ControlNet author
#23Interesting, and I look forward to using it, but I wish the distribution had kept the folder-name conventions of AUTOMATIC1111, so that we could more easily have used symbolic links for folders of LoRAs and checkpoints etc. that we'd rather not duplicate.
i’m sure there are ways around it no?
Re: Fooocus: OSS for image generation by ControlNet author
#24Those commits are something else.
Re: Fooocus: OSS for image generation by ControlNet author
#25Anything better than X forwarding?
Re: Fooocus: OSS for image generation by ControlNet author
#26Are there ways to run such apps with a remote GPU over network? I want to run the UI on my laptop, but use my homeserver GPU from the local network. Anything better than X forwarding?
Re: Fooocus: OSS for image generation by ControlNet author
#27Are there ways to run such apps with a remote GPU over network? I want to run the UI on my laptop, but use my homeserver GPU from the local network. Anything better than X forwarding?
This project returns results over HTTP. You get what you want by running the server binary on the server, then access it with your web browser.
Re: Fooocus: OSS for image generation by ControlNet author
#28Except prompt-based tweaking doesn’t work very well in MJ; certainly not as well as manually-directed in-painting and out-painting. It’s virtually impossible in MJ to hold one part of the image constant while adding to/modifying the remainder.
Re: Fooocus: OSS for image generation by ControlNet author
#29The names given to the commits are... peculiar.
Tbh I’m (loosely) following commit message best practices in all of my projects out of irrational fear of being viewed as unprofessional. But never needed that effing prose in my workflow. Maybe a keyword from time to time. I’m using code, not messages to navigate history, and in a rare occasion. If all my messages turned into “i” I’d lose nothing, because all rationales and essentials are in code comments. I’d bette…
Otherwise the main use case I have for a commit message is that it fills out the GitHub PR for me with something useful.
Re: Fooocus: OSS for image generation by ControlNet author
#30> Linux and Mac > Coming soon ... Ah well. Hopefully it is soon. Also, on behalf of all Apple Silicon Mac users, would be nice if the author looked into implementing Metal FlashAttention [1]. 1. https://github.com/philipturner/metal-flash-attention