RunanywhereAI / RunanywhereAI/wally

Design explicit opt-in automatic local/cloud routing after MVP

Open
#96 0 comments 0 reactions 0 assignees View on GitHub

Nobody has claimed this yet.

enhancement P2 post-mvp
Dominant language
C++
Stars
1.5k
Forks
86
Avg merge
6h 53m
Merged PRs (30d)
50

Description

Overview

Current routing chooses installed local model then signed-in upstream; found-local failures do not fallback. Automatic hybrid routing was explicitly deferred.

Priority: P2 / post-mvp. Impact: roadmap improvement. Initial planning estimate: Medium; refine after inventory. This issue does not add a release blocker.

Current evidence

Current routing chooses installed local model then signed-in upstream; found-local failures do not fallback. Automatic hybrid routing was explicitly deferred.

Design and implementation plan

Specify opt-in routing policy, consent/cost/privacy behavior and deterministic fallback; reuse SDK resolution and existing gateway. Historical $10 acquisition credit is not fixed policy.

  1. Reconcile the current implementation and any already completed work with the evidence above.
  2. Record the owner, selected scope, dependencies and unresolved decisions before implementation.
  3. Implement or execute the selected scope using existing components and artifacts.
  4. Attach reproducible validation or outcome evidence and record any deferred work.

Acceptance criteria

  • Document policy matrix for offline, unavailable model, local failure, cloud auth/credit/capacity failure and user-forced local/cloud.
  • Never upload local prompt or incur cloud spend silently.
  • Test deterministic selection and expose selected target without secrets.

Related work and deduplication

No existing issue has this acceptance scope; existing release defects remain separate.

No exact existing issue found in the all-state inventory.

Requirement provenance

Reconciled September 13, 2026 against WALLY_CLOUD_PRODUCT_SOURCES.md (SHA-256 e601b7b154b750965fa8d25d4533d3542621bd00b3bb30038c1fae553a549e7b) and the consolidated requirements report. Historical proposals are not evidence of current delivery, customer agreement or approved pricing.

Source records and physical line references

Records: C06-055, C03-66.

Lines: 17320–17328, 8342–8355.

Contributor guide

Open the contributing guide

First steps

  1. Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
  2. Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
  3. Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
  4. Open a pull request that references the issue number.

Research direction

Start by reading the routing logic in src/harness/opencode.cpp around line 191 and src/commands/cmd_harness.cpp around line 30, then reconcile it with the SDK resolution and gateway components. Before implementation, record the owner, scope, dependencies, and unresolved policy decisions. Done means the policy matrix is documented, routing is deterministic and opt-in, no cloud action is silent, and validation exposes the selected target without secrets.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.

Assessment

Tech stack
cpp
Domain
ai, backend
Issue type
Feature
Difficulty
5/5
Estimated time
Over a week
Activity status
Active
Clarity
Needs clarification
Newbie friendliness
35/100

Get new issues in your inbox

A short digest of beginner-friendly GitHub issues.