When do you plan to merge this? There is a new PR that needs these changes.

@bhack, We decided to merge it after coming release. This PR contains major changes and it's better to debug it between two OpenCV versions.

You can rebase your branch with these changes and refer this PR.

If you can push this branch in Opencv the student could open a PR on this branch.

Yes, as @bhack said, I would like to open a PR that depends on this one. I have added a generation and segmentation module to the API and It would be great if I could get the PRs reviewed as soon as possible so I can adapt/fix them if necessary

@dvd42, @bhack, there is no technical problem to do that:

git remote add l-bat https://github.com/l-bat/opencv
git fetch l-bat high_level_API
git checkout high_level_API
git rebase high_level_API your_branch
git push your_fork your_branch

Is not that the case. The scope was to open a github PR with the minimal diff here. If not Diego will need to open on l-bat github fork but probably nobody will review there.

@bhack , @dkurt meant that Diego can make changes on top of commits from this PR and include it in theirs PR to the main repository (opencv/opencv). After this PR is merged, these commits will be hidden from Diego's PR.

Now:
  #14780 - commitA, commitB
  #<new PR> - commitA, commitB, commitX

After #14780 is merged:
  #14780 - closed
  #<new PR> - commitX

We can help with rebasing if you have any troubles.

Yes I know but I meant can you review also if the PR has comittA and commitB in the diff and it is not so clean?
If you can push the branch in this repo it could be easier to review cause the diff will be minimized.

@bhack, Yes, it's not a problem to review the changes.

I created 2 PRs, from my fork against opencv/master adding a generation and segmentation module

I created 1 PR for this module, from my fork against opencv/master adding a keypoints module. This module raises the problem that G-API is trying to fix by integrating detection and landmarking into one pipeline. Maybe we could do something similar for this high-level API, by concatenating modules?

@dvd42, Maybe yes but not now. We need to solve current issue first.