You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
We should consider switching from SMP to TorchSeg for our segmentation models.
Rationale
SMP is no longer maintained. TorchSeg is a fork providing important features we need:
Support for modern versions of timm
Support for ViT backends
Fewer dependencies
Better CI
Implementation
Should be a simple s/segmentation_models_pytorch/torchseg/g.
However, there are a few more things I would like to see in TorchSeg before committing to the switch:
Dependabot used to manage all dependencies, especially timm
Minimum version testing, especially timm
These are things I can set up myself when I have time (hopefully soon!)
Alternatives
I have not yet found a better alternative to SMP.
If SMP becomes maintained once again, we could contribute back all of the improvements in TorchSeg. But I find this unlikely, and I like the control we have over TorchSeg if we need to quickly add new features.
Additional information
@isaaccorley I'm opening this issue to make sure I don't forget to do this before the 0.6 release sometime in April.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I can work on figuring out why dependabot and codecov wasn't working. I'll also try running some tests with different version of timm to see what happens.
Summary
We should consider switching from SMP to TorchSeg for our segmentation models.
Rationale
SMP is no longer maintained. TorchSeg is a fork providing important features we need:
Implementation
Should be a simple
s/segmentation_models_pytorch/torchseg/g
.However, there are a few more things I would like to see in TorchSeg before committing to the switch:
These are things I can set up myself when I have time (hopefully soon!)
Alternatives
I have not yet found a better alternative to SMP.
If SMP becomes maintained once again, we could contribute back all of the improvements in TorchSeg. But I find this unlikely, and I like the control we have over TorchSeg if we need to quickly add new features.
Additional information
@isaaccorley I'm opening this issue to make sure I don't forget to do this before the 0.6 release sometime in April.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: