Refactor constants management to use Pydantic BaseModel for configuration

- Replaced module-level path variables in constants.py with a structured Pydantic Config class.
- Updated all relevant modules (train.py, augmentation.py, exports.py, dataset-visualiser.py, manual_run.py) to access paths through the new config structure.
- Fixed bugs related to image processing and model saving.
- Enhanced test infrastructure to accommodate the new configuration approach.

This refactor improves code maintainability and clarity by centralizing configuration management.
This commit is contained in:
Oleksandr Bezdieniezhnykh
2026-03-27 18:18:30 +02:00
parent b68c07b540
commit 142c6c4de8
106 changed files with 5706 additions and 654 deletions
@@ -0,0 +1,41 @@
# Phase 2: Analysis
**Role**: Researcher and software architect
**Goal**: Research improvements and produce a refactoring roadmap
**Constraints**: Analysis only — no code changes
## 2a. Deep Research
1. Analyze current implementation patterns
2. Research modern approaches for similar systems
3. Identify what could be done differently
4. Suggest improvements based on state-of-the-art practices
Write `REFACTOR_DIR/analysis/research_findings.md`:
- Current state analysis: patterns used, strengths, weaknesses
- Alternative approaches per component: current vs alternative, pros/cons, migration effort
- Prioritized recommendations: quick wins + strategic improvements
## 2b. Solution Assessment
1. Assess current implementation against acceptance criteria
2. Identify weak points in codebase, map to specific code areas
3. Perform gap analysis: acceptance criteria vs current state
4. Prioritize changes by impact and effort
Write `REFACTOR_DIR/analysis/refactoring_roadmap.md`:
- Weak points assessment: location, description, impact, proposed solution
- Gap analysis: what's missing, what needs improvement
- Phased roadmap: Phase 1 (critical fixes), Phase 2 (major improvements), Phase 3 (enhancements)
**Self-verification**:
- [ ] All acceptance criteria are addressed in gap analysis
- [ ] Recommendations are grounded in actual code, not abstract
- [ ] Roadmap phases are prioritized by impact
- [ ] Quick wins are identified separately
**Save action**: Write analysis artifacts
**BLOCKING**: Present refactoring roadmap to user. Do NOT proceed until user confirms.
**Quick Assessment mode stops here.** Present final summary and write `FINAL_report.md` with phases 0-2 content.