IMO, we should just add rag to the default template and not do scenarios.

@Vperiodt #5478

suggestion are addressed, may be I can make one more PR for recommendation engine one, will keep this PR scope small as of now, thanks !

@franciscojavierarceo The ideology of scenario is coming from #5264. The template are backend-based and without much of user context to it WHEREAS scenarios are real production-like deployments that customers can directly try and gain experience of feast usage with given Notebooks/Readme in deployment scenarios. So I would prefer to go with scenario and templates as two different options.

The plan also to design a feast-lab(within feast OR outside) with multiple scenarios to try out like banking/RAG/recommendation etc and hence by using -s OR --scenario we could have directly pull those feat-labs scenarios.

What do you think on this ?

I guess I think we could put them all in one bc they're lightweight examples

Thanks for the review!
Regarding the current scope: I’ve implemented the RAG template (City Wikipedia) and merged it with the driver example. As of now, running feast init <project_name> will create both projects in the same directory, allowing users to navigate to either and explore the demos.

I deliberately held off on adding the Recommendation System in this PR to keep the changes focused and easier to review.
Plan for immediate follow-up PRs is:

1. Add the Recommendation System (so feast init will eventually generate three demos).
2. Extend the driver demos to include ODFV transforms.

I think for RAG use case TTL could be in days than hours, wdyt ?