ultralytics 8.1.2 scope HUB-SDK imports

[glenn-jocher]

Scopes HUB-SDK imports to allow for Conda publishing.

🛠️ PR Summary

_{Made with ❤️ by Ultralytics Actions}

🌟 Summary

Updated dependencies and internal references related to Ultralytics HUB.

📊 Key Changes

• Removed hub-sdk from main dependencies, now listed as an optional "extra".
• Changed version from 8.1.1 to 8.1.2.
• Modified import statements to use updated references to HUB_API_ROOT and HUB_WEB_ROOT.
• Added a requirements check for hub-sdk before using HUBClient to ensure the required package is installed.
• Created environment variables for HUB_API_ROOT and HUB_WEB_ROOT to make the API endpoints easily configurable.
• Streamlined method for checking if a model identifier corresponds to a valid HUB model.
• Removed redundant comments and spaces for clarity and style.

🎯 Purpose & Impact

• 🛠️ Cleaner Dependency Management: By moving hub-sdk to optional dependencies, users who do not need HUB functionality won't have to install it, reducing unnecessary overhead.
• 🔄 Better Version Tracking: Incrementing version numbers aids users and developers in tracking changes and updates.
• 🔗 Flexible API Configuration: With environment variables controlling API endpoints, the system becomes more flexible for deployment in various environments, possibly facilitating testing or enterprise integration.
• 📦 Module Import Integrity: Ensuring the requirement of hub-sdk before using HUBClient prevents runtime errors due to missing dependencies.
• ⚙️ Smarter Model Identification: Streamlining the model checking logic could result in more efficient operations when interacting with the Ultralytics HUB.
• ✨ Improved Code Readability: Cleanup in code comments and structure enhances readability, making maintenance and further development more straightforward.

📝 Note: Non-expert users might not directly interact with these changes, but they contribute to a more stable and versatile software ecosystem.

[glenn-jocher]

@kalenmike @hassaanfarooq01 I'm scoping HUB-SDK imports here to resolve the Conda build issues. I noticed most of the usage is importing HUB_WEB_ROOT and HUB_API_ROOT:

Could we define these locally identically to allow for local imports instead of importing them from hub_sdk?

https://github.com/ultralytics/hub-sdk/blob/33129b9287685ae2b31d2d7d1d8933b74b61427f/hub_sdk/config.py#L3-L4

HUB_API_ROOT = os.environ.get("ULTRALYTICS_HUB_API", "https://api.ultralytics.com")
HUB_WEB_ROOT = os.environ.get("ULTRALYTICS_HUB_WEB", "https://hub.ultralytics.com")

This would make this part simpler, otherwise I don't see a solution to running this check on model load:

ultralytics/ultralytics/engine/model.py

Lines 120 to 129 in cf50bd9

	def is_hub_model(model):
	"""Check if the provided model is a HUB model."""
	return any(
	(
	model.startswith(f"{HUB_WEB_ROOT}/models/"), # i.e. https://hub.ultralytics.com/models/MODEL_ID
	[len(x) for x in model.split("_")] == [42, 20], # APIKEY_MODELID
	len(model) == 20 and not Path(model).exists() and all(x not in model for x in "./\\"),
	)
	) # MODELID

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: 4 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Comparison is base (b128254) 76.10% compared to head (c2cc4f2) 76.08%.

Files	Patch %	Lines
ultralytics/hub/__init__.py	50.00%	2 Missing ⚠️
ultralytics/hub/session.py	60.00%	2 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #7596      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   76.10%   76.08%   -0.02%     
==========================================
  Files         117      117              
  Lines       14332    14336       +4     
==========================================
+ Hits        10907    10908       +1     
- Misses       3425     3428       +3     

Flag	Coverage Δ
Benchmarks	35.73% <53.33%> (-0.01%)	⬇️
GPU	39.76% <73.33%> (+0.17%)	⬆️
Tests	71.18% <73.33%> (-0.02%)	⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.