LinasKo
LinasKo
@SkalskiP, Ready for review, details in #1108.
I like Onuralp's idea about merging this with the standard label annotator, but I don't know whether that would break anything in systems currently in use. If we can apply...
I'll see if I can review in the next few days. (Though we're pretty short on time lately)
> If you may I can handle it That would be most helpful :) > I just need opinion about merge into label without api break or separate annotator that's...
Hi @mario-dg :wave: We spoke with **SkalskiP** - I'll see if I can review your code today. We know of a few changes still needed, but I need to ramp-up...
> The whole point of the `data` field is to give people flexibility. The `data` can contain anything. It seems to me that the most challenging task will involve linking...
Hey @mario-dg, Good work! I'm reviewing it now. For testing, you might find something useful in [this Colab](https://colab.research.google.com/drive/1j85QErM74VCSLADoGliM296q4GFUdnGM?usp=sharing). If you remove the inference slicer and its callbacks, you should be...
Other than that, I like how this looks. It would be cool to see how fast it runs :)
Upon closer inspection, `mypy` revealed issues relating to datatypes. Specifically, many of the variables we have such as `class_id` and `tracker_id` may be `None`. Also, in the output we expect...