Rename to llm

[philpax]

With our (hopefully) incoming support for #85 and #75, this crate is growing beyond just LLaMA support. At the same time, llama_rs is a little unwieldy as a crate name.

To accommodate this, I've taken the liberty of reserving the llm crate name. Just before we release 0.1.0, llama-rs will be renamed to llm, and llama-cli will become llm-cli (but likely have the binary name llm, so you can do llm bloom infer -m bloom_model -p "what's the capital of Virginia?").

Each model would be under its own feature flag, so you would only pay for what you use.

[setzer22]

As already discussed, I agree with the change on the crate name, since it's quite obvious that it's a rust project there. What I'm not sure about, is the github repo name. It's nice to have the crate and the repo be the same thing, but calling the repo just llm would feel like a bit too much.

If it weren't for the completely unrelated recent events, I would've suggested rust-llm for the repo, but let's better not...

[philpax]

rustformers/llm seems fine to me. I wouldn't worry too much about that.

[KerfuffleV2]

What about llm-rs? (Also if it's not a secret, what unrelated recent events?)

[philpax]

What about llm-rs?

For the repo name? Yeah that'd be fine, I just don't want _rs in the crate name itself

(Also if it's not a secret, what unrelated recent events?)

https://www.reddit.com/r/rust/comments/12e7tdb/rust_trademark_policy_feedback_form/

[katopz]

• llm is fine for crate because it's in Rust context/domain already. so no rs needed.
• llm-rs for repos is good idea because it's in github with many other languages (easier while search).

Aww, naming is hard!

[philpax]

I've updated all of the crates and the README, but I'll need @setzer22 to give me full permissions to update the repo name.

I'm still leaning towards rustformers/llm for now - I think rustformers is sufficiently evocative

[philpax]

Done 🚀