epic: Semantic naming for Cortex Engines?

[dan-menlo]

Goal / Summary of discussion

• We should have more semantic naming format for Cortex engines
• We should go with how the upstream authors name it, i.e.
  • onnxruntime
  • llama-cpp
  • tensorrt-llm

#	Name	Supported Formats	Version	Status
1	onnxruntime	ONNX	0.0.1	Incompatible
2	llama-cpp	GGUF	0.0.1	Ready
3	tensorrt-llm	TensorRT Engines	0.0.1	Incompatible

Out of scope - renaming repos?

For the Repos, I recommend we add an *-engine suffix to differentiate us from the upstream library:

Old Repo name	New Repo name
janhq/cortex.tensorrt-llm	janhq/tensorrt-llm-engine
janhq/cortex.llamacpp	janhq/llamacpp-engine
janhq/cortex.onnx	janhq/onnxruntime-engine

Tasklist

• Discussion: Cortex Engines should be semantically named? #1167
• Make changes once team has consensus

[namchuai]

IMO, maybe keep it as llamacpp, onnx and tensorrt

[dan-menlo]

@tikikun @nguyenhoangthuan99 Can I check: if we are using "engine names", should it be:

• llamacpp (format: gguf)
• onnxruntime (format: onnx)
• tensorrt-llm? (format: tensorrt engines)