Skip to content

Restore LineSegmentDetector LSD & avoid license conflict #17250

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

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

Restore LineSegmentDetector LSD & avoid license conflict #17250

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

jeanchristopheruel
Copy link

@jeanchristopheruel jeanchristopheruel commented May 9, 2020

Relative to #2524
Original issue with license conflict: #2016

Pull Request Readiness Checklist

See details at https://github.com/opencv/opencv/wiki/How_to_contribute#making-a-good-pull-request

  • I agree to contribute to the project under OpenCV (BSD) License.
  • To the best of my knowledge, the proposed patch is not based on a code under GPL or other license that is incompatible with OpenCV
  • The PR is proposed to proper branch
  • There is reference to original bug report and related work
  • There is accuracy test, performance test and test data in opencv_extra repository, if applicable
    Patch to opencv_extra has the same branch name.
  • The feature is well documented and sample code can be built with the project CMake

@asmorkalov
Copy link
Contributor

@vpisarev could you look at it?

@vpisarev
Copy link
Contributor

vpisarev commented May 12, 2020

@ruelj2, thank you for the contribution! It's much better, but still I can find many many similarities, e.g. in the rect_improve, like variable names, comments etc. That is, the code does not seem to be written from scratch, but rather a refactored original implementation

@vpisarev vpisarev self-assigned this May 12, 2020
@jeanchristopheruel
Copy link
Author

jeanchristopheruel commented May 12, 2020

Thanks for the review! As the original issue with license conflict #2016 stated, the only code that seemed to be conflicting was the "Compare doubles by relative error" which is the only thing I changed from the original code.

As mentioned here, it now seems that the whole code should be refactored from scratch. Working on that, closing the PR.

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants