mirror of
https://github.com/azaion/ai-training.git
synced 2026-04-23 04:36:36 +00:00
Oleksandr Bezdieniezhnykh
142c6c4de8
- 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.
42 lines
1.7 KiB
Markdown
42 lines
1.7 KiB
Markdown
# 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.
|