Doc: Implementation Process Description #526
Conversation
|
The created documentation from the pull request is available at: docu-html |
| Detailed Design Template | ||
| ######################## | ||
|
|
||
| .. gd_temp:: Stakeholder Requirements Templates |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| .. gd_temp:: Stakeholder Requirements Templates | |
| .. gd_temp:: Detailed Design Templates |
PandaeDo
force-pushed
the
vohae_detailed_design
branch
from
82e2575 to
92d3a21
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
As this is "Draft" I only leave comments:
- see inline plus some general ones:
- SW development plan document should be mentioned in process and created in this PR
- Metamodel change for DD artefacts is missing
- Detailed_design_checklist is missing (may be reused from incubator)
| | :id: UNIT_DD_STA__<Component>__<Title> | ||
| | :security: <YES|NO> | ||
| | :safety: <QM|ASIL_B|ASIL_D> | ||
| | :satisfies: <link to component requirement id> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
according to docs/process/general_concepts/_assets/score_building_blocks_meta_model.svg (in #343) we expect "implements" link from DD to Component req and "satisfies" link from DD to Component Architecture.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I would call this file detailed_design_template
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Renamed it to detailed_design_template
| ======================== | ||
|
|
||
| .. gd_chklst:: Implementation | ||
| :id: gd_chklst__implementation |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
according naming convention should be: gd_chklst__impl__inspection
| - Issue link | ||
| * - REQ_01_01 | ||
| - Is the code developed as per implementation guideline? | ||
| - see :need:`gd_guidl__implementation`, this includes the use of "shall". |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
" this includes the use of "shall"." makes no sense here
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Removed it. It was a copy+paste failure.
| - Passed | ||
| - Remarks | ||
| - Issue link | ||
| * - REQ_01_01 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
should be IMPL_01_01
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Changed IDs it to IMPL__
| Static Code Analyis | ||
| =================== | ||
|
|
||
| <TDB> tool to enforce coding rules e.g. axivion, parasoft c++, helix qac |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
also here: no discussion
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Deleted enumeration.
|
|
||
| .. .. code-block:: shell | ||
|
|
||
| .. bazel test //:format.check |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
that is a good point, maybe also add the local "bazel build //docs"?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Added bazel build//docs
| :status: valid | ||
| :complies: std_wp__iso26262__software_10, std_req__iso26262__software_29 | ||
|
|
||
| Implementation of a Unit |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
https://github.com/eclipse-score/score/blob/main/docs/process/workproducts/index.rst already defines relevant work products: wp__sw_implementation, wp__sw_unit_test, wp__sw_code_inspect -> expectation is to reuse these and remove from the "general" workproducts/index
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Reuse of wp__sw_implementation, wp__sw_unit_test. Unclear how to proceed with wp__sw_code_inspect
| Workflow Implementation | ||
| ####################### | ||
|
|
||
| .. ? Haben wir einen Workflow für Implementation |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
no, we had not, but we need, please create those workflows for all the work procucts of impl. process
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Workflows for Detailed Design an Unit Test created.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That is not sufficient as a guideline. I expect even three guidelines: Detailed Design, Guideline C++, Guideline Rust
And it should define for example for DD: how to fill the template, e.g. which UML diagrams types to use, do we have also Doxygen Style comments for the DD in code (I thought so) ...
And for the C++ guideline: how do we configure the SW, how do we expect comments, how do we do the MISRA checker annotations ...
License Check Results🚀 The license check preparation job ran successfully. Status: Click to expand output |
Initial Version of the process description for implementation. Fixes eclipse-score#309 Signed-off-by: Volker <volker.haeussler@qorix.ai>
vinodreddy-g
force-pushed
the
vohae_detailed_design
branch
from
3777475 to
6486e0c
Compare
Initial Version of the process description for implementation.
Fixes #309