Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Migrate the build system to poetry #1023

Open
wants to merge 9 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

SamuelYvon
Copy link

@SamuelYvon SamuelYvon commented May 18, 2023

What is this PR

I suggest migrating the build system from the traditional setup to using a more modern / advanced tool such as poetry. This work is not complete yet and I have a few things to fix.

Motivation

The motivation for this is that it is very hard to integrate easyocr in external projects that require opencv or / and pytorch. This is the case of many machine learning solutions that use different versions (specifically, the distribution of opencv, or pytorch in CPU only mode). These changes keep the same dependencies for the default pip package (I'm unsure where / how you built it in the past) but allow users of easyocr as a library to tweak the exact dependencies.

Unintended Consequences

Poetry has some limitations. In this case, we would like to force the choice of any of the opencv choices as well as torch, which is not a supported use case for poetry. This has to be managed by the user. As a preventative measure, I added a check in the main __init__.py file that both libraries can be imported

What's left

  • Test matrix for all build combination
  • Documentation

Bug addressed

@JaidedTeam Before I finish working on this, I want to make sure this is a change you want to see in the library. If you have no interest, I will maintain my own fork for my own purposes, but I truly believe this is a better solution than the current requirements.txt

@SamuelYvon SamuelYvon marked this pull request as draft May 18, 2023 17:23
@ReFlo
Copy link

ReFlo commented Aug 29, 2023

I would be very happy about this changes :-)

Dockerfile Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@SamuelYvon
Copy link
Author

I would be very happy about this changes :-)

Great! I will try to get it back to speed today. Haven't looked at it in a bit :)

@SamuelYvon SamuelYvon marked this pull request as ready for review August 29, 2023 14:31
@SamuelYvon
Copy link
Author

I've adjusted and cleaned up a bit. The doc is also updated to reflect the buildmatrix. I did not add test for all combinations.

@SamuelYvon SamuelYvon requested a review from ReFlo August 29, 2023 14:32
Copy link

@ReFlo ReFlo left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Great work

@ReFlo
Copy link

ReFlo commented Aug 29, 2023

Thanks for that fast response !

@ReFlo
Copy link

ReFlo commented Aug 30, 2023

Lets hope that it will be approved and merged soon 💯

@ReFlo
Copy link

ReFlo commented Aug 30, 2023

@JaidedTeam is there any possibility to do a review and a release during the next time ?

@browser-bug
Copy link

Yes please, this would be very useful. We're using EasyOCR in an environment where no GPU support is available so we're forced to take down a huge slice of useless dependencies space.

@ReFlo
Copy link

ReFlo commented Nov 22, 2023

@SamuelYvon Seems like this branch has some conflicts

@SamuelYvon
Copy link
Author

It does but nobody from JaidedAI seems concerned about it, so I'll put this in my backlog. If a maintainer that can approve / merge sees this, feel free to ping me and I'll fix things.

@ReFlo
Copy link

ReFlo commented Nov 22, 2023

@JaidedTeam This PR is open since may and i still need it :-) Any possibility to review and merge it soon ?

@ReFlo
Copy link

ReFlo commented Nov 30, 2023

Still no feedback from the @JaidedTeam 👎

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants