Replace pdm to uv in README

[r0x0d]

Description

It seems that a couple of references to pdm were still present in the README, which I believe is a leftover, since the project is using uv.

Type of change

• Refactor
• New feature
• Bug fix
• CVE fix
• Optimization
• Documentation Update
• Configuration Update
• Bump-up service version
• Bump-up dependent library
• Bump-up library or tool used for development (does not change the final image)
• CI configuration change
• Konflux configuration change
• Unit tests improvement
• Integration tests improvement
• End to end tests improvement

Related Tickets & Documents

• Related Issue #
• Closes #

Checklist before requesting a review

• I have performed a self-review of my code.
• PR has passed all pre-merge test jobs.
• If it is a core feature, I have added thorough tests.

Testing

• Please provide detailed steps to perform tests related to this code change.
• How were the fix/results from this change verified? Please provide relevant screenshots or results.

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Documentation
  • Updated README examples to use uv run instead of pdm run.
  • Revised instructions for the embedding model download and running the custom processor (two occurrences) to align with uv-based workflows.
  • No behavioral or interface changes; commands, arguments, and outputs remain identical.
  • Improves clarity and consistency for setup and execution, reducing potential confusion for users following the quickstart and usage examples.

[coderabbitai]

Walkthrough

README documentation updated to replace pdm run with uv run in three code blocks: one for embedding model download and two for running the custom processor. No code or interface changes.

Changes

Cohort / File(s)	Summary
Docs: command runner switch README.md	Replaced occurrences of "pdm run" with "uv run" in three code blocks: embedding model download and two custom processor run examples.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 1 (Trivial) | ⏱️ ~2 minutes

Pre-merge checks (3 passed)

✅ Passed checks (3 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Description Check	✅ Passed	Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title Check	✅ Passed	The title "Replace pdm to uv in README" directly describes the primary documented change in the README (replacing pdm with uv) and is concise and relevant to the changeset, so it meets the clarity and relevance criteria; the wording is slightly awkward grammatically but remains unambiguous.
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	No functions found in the changes. Docstring coverage check skipped.

Poem

I nibble on docs with whiskers of sun,
Swapping pdm for uv—quick hop, and done.
Three blocks aligned, the paths now run true,
Carrots of clarity in lines we renew.
(\/)<
( ••) tidy!
/︶︶\ 🌟

Tip

👮 Agentic pre-merge checks are now available in preview!

Pro plan users can now enable pre-merge checks in their settings to enforce checklists before merging PRs.

• Built-in checks – Quickly apply ready-made checks to enforce title conventions, require pull request descriptions that follow templates, validate linked issues for compliance, and more.
• Custom agentic checks – Define your own rules using CodeRabbit’s advanced agentic capabilities to enforce organization-specific policies and workflows. For example, you can instruct CodeRabbit’s agent to verify that API documentation is updated whenever API schema files are modified in a PR. Note: Upto 5 custom checks are currently allowed during the preview period. Pricing for this feature will be announced in a few weeks.

Please see the documentation for more information.

Example:

reviews:
  pre_merge_checks:
    custom_checks:
      - name: "Undocumented Breaking Changes"
        mode: "warning"
        instructions: |
          Pass/fail criteria: All breaking changes to public APIs, CLI flags, environment variables, configuration keys, database schemas, or HTTP/GraphQL endpoints must be documented in the "Breaking Change" section of the PR description and in CHANGELOG.md. Exclude purely internal or private changes (e.g., code not exported from package entry points or explicitly marked as internal).

Please share your feedback with us on this Discord post.

✨ Finishing touches

🧪 Generate unit tests

• Create PR with unit tests
• Post copyable unit tests in a comment

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.}

[coderabbitai]

Actionable comments posted: 0

🧹 Nitpick comments (3)

README.md (3)

89-92: Use mkdir -p for idempotency; change looks good.

Replacing pdm with uv here is correct. Consider making the directory creation idempotent.

-   mkdir ./embeddings_model
+   mkdir -p ./embeddings_model

---

216-224: Run the script via Python for portability and consistency.

uv run ./custom_processor.py relies on an executable bit and shebang. Using Python mirrors the earlier example and works cross‑platform.

-uv run ./custom_processor.py \
+uv run python ./custom_processor.py \

---

264-272: Apply the same invocation style here.

Align with the Faiss example to avoid shebang/executable assumptions.

-uv run ./custom_processor.py \
+uv run python ./custom_processor.py \

📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 275a28c and 811806c.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• README.md (3 hunks)

[tisnik]

LGTM