process: add initial tool management #932

masc2023 · 2025-04-15T06:48:30Z

Resolves: #858

github-actions · 2025-04-15T06:49:17Z

License Check Results

🚀 The license check job ran with the Bazel command:

bazel run //:license-check

Status: ✅ Passed

Click to expand output

[License Check Output]
Extracting Bazel installation...
Starting local Bazel server and connecting to it...
INFO: Invocation ID: 7ac3ef9b-c3b5-4510-b38d-58b58674d469
Computing main repo mapping: 
Computing main repo mapping: 
Computing main repo mapping: 
Computing main repo mapping: 
Computing main repo mapping: 
Computing main repo mapping: 
Loading: 
Loading: 0 packages loaded
Analyzing: target //:license-check (1 packages loaded, 0 targets configured)
Analyzing: target //:license-check (1 packages loaded, 0 targets configured)

Analyzing: target //:license-check (90 packages loaded, 10 targets configured)

Analyzing: target //:license-check (126 packages loaded, 417 targets configured)

Analyzing: target //:license-check (131 packages loaded, 1598 targets configured)

Analyzing: target //:license-check (140 packages loaded, 2430 targets configured)

Analyzing: target //:license-check (145 packages loaded, 2465 targets configured)

Analyzing: target //:license-check (149 packages loaded, 4611 targets configured)

INFO: Analyzed target //:license-check (150 packages loaded, 4737 targets configured).
[8 / 13] Creating runfiles tree bazel-out/k8-opt-exec-ST-d57f47055a04/bin/external/score_dash_license_checker~/tool/formatters/dash_format_converter.runfiles [for tool]; 0s local ... (2 actions, 1 running)
INFO: Found 1 target...
Target //:license.check.license_check up-to-date:
  bazel-bin/license.check.license_check
  bazel-bin/license.check.license_check.jar
INFO: Elapsed time: 17.926s, Critical Path: 0.57s
INFO: 13 processes: 4 disk cache hit, 9 internal.
INFO: Build completed successfully, 13 total actions
INFO: Running command line: bazel-bin/license.check.license_check ./formatted.txt -review -project automotive.score -repo https://github.com/eclipse-score/score -token otyhZ4eaRYK1tKLNNF-Y
[main] INFO Querying Eclipse Foundation for license data for 76 items.
[main] INFO Found 52 items.
[main] INFO Querying ClearlyDefined for license data for 24 items.
[main] INFO Found 24 items.
[main] INFO Vetted license information was found for all content. No further investigation is required.

github-actions · 2025-04-15T06:51:27Z

The created documentation from the pull request is available at: docu-html

aschemmel-tech

see inline comments

docs/process/process_areas/tool_management/tool_management_getstrt.rst

docs/process/process_areas/tool_management/tool_management_workflow.rst

docs/process/process_areas/tool_management/tool_management_workproducts.rst

docs/process/process_areas/tool_management/guidance/tool_management_checklist.rst

docs/process/process_areas/tool_management/guidance/tool_management_template.rst

docs/process/process_areas/tool_management/guidance/tool_management_checklist.rst

docs/platform_management_plan/tool_management.rst

docs/process/process_areas/tool_management/guidance/tool_management_checklist.rst

pahmann · 2025-04-29T06:45:04Z

docs/process/process_areas/tool_management/guidance/tool_management_checklist.rst

+
+   | **1. Purpose**
+   | The purpose of this checklist is to collect the topics to be checked during a tool verification..
+   | It will not be filled out but considered during the review and monitoring to complete of the Tool Verification Report.


Suggested change

| It will not be filled out but considered during the review and monitoring to complete of the Tool Verification Report.

| It will not be filled out, but considered during the review and monitoring to complete of the Tool Verification Report.

docs/process/process_areas/tool_management/guidance/tool_management_template.rst

docs/process/process_areas/tool_management/tool_management_concept.rst

docs/platform_management_plan/tool_management.rst

AlexanderLanin · 2025-04-30T08:32:49Z

docs/platform_management_plan/tool_management.rst

+The purpose of the Tool Management Plan is to guide the identification, evaluation and qualification of
+project tools.


Using "qualification" without a clear reference to safety is confusing?! As usually there is no qualification. Maybe just change it to "safety qualification"?

Please again, forgot looking only to safety, our process framework does conform to multiple standards and for you as user, only our process are relevant, the framework is mapped to the relevant standard and it defines, what we do for qualification, in our case. I add for current state just safe and secure use of tools, maybe replace in future by trustable use in the tool, where trustable may include more than safe and secure

docs/platform_management_plan/tool_management.rst

AlexanderLanin · 2025-04-30T08:36:36Z

docs/platform_management_plan/tool_management.rst

+Qualification
+^^^^^^^^^^^^^
+
+As method "validation of software tool" is applied.


Why not apply the other methods? I would personally much rather have a tool development process.

What development process? I just said, that we use S-CORE parts for tools too, and independent of that, having requirements or goals or how ever you call it, and you test that is minimum in my view

AlexanderLanin · 2025-04-30T08:59:17Z

docs/process/process_areas/tool_management/tool_management_getstrt.rst

+* Make familiar with the development and supporting process descriptions in :ref:`process_description`
+* Make familiar with the relevant sections of the :ref:`Platform Management Plan <pmp>`, here especially with :need:`Tool Management Plan <doc__platform_tool_management_plan>`


Suggested change

* Make familiar with the development and supporting process descriptions in :ref:`process_description`

* Make familiar with the relevant sections of the :ref:`Platform Management Plan <pmp>`, here especially with :need:`Tool Management Plan <doc__platform_tool_management_plan>`

* Make yourself familiar with the development and supporting process descriptions in :ref:`process_description`

* Make yourself familiar with the relevant sections of the :ref:`Platform Management Plan <pmp>`, here especially with :need:`Tool Management Plan <doc__platform_tool_management_plan>`

Unclear, just understood you changed the order, that is done

I've added "yourself" --> "Make yourself familiar"

docs/process/process_areas/tool_management/tool_management_workflow.rst

AlexanderLanin · 2025-04-30T09:02:41Z

docs/process/process_areas/tool_management/tool_management_workflow.rst

+
+   Finally the Tool Verification Report is verified and approved, and thus in Released state.
+
+   For creating the Tool Verification Report a template must be used.


"The defined template"?

Note however, that technically we'll most likely use markdown or even yaml and not rst files for that. However we can use the template chapters etc.

you see in the needs the linked templates, so I added the linked template, which is visible in the Sphinx HTML documentation

docs/process/process_areas/tool_management/tool_management_workproducts.rst

aschemmel-tech

my remarks are all covered

Review outdated

AlexanderLanin · 2025-04-30T15:58:44Z

@masc2023 I would highly recommend pushing new commits instead of squashing locally. I now have no chance to see what has changed since my review.
Instead I recommend squashing here on the website once the pull request is approved.

aschemmel-tech

New changes (especially process requirements) still ok. Maybe you consider to also update the process status page.

pahmann

All my findings have been resolved.

Resolves: #858

masc2023 · 2025-05-06T09:12:13Z

All my findings have been resolved.

@pahmann or @aschemmel-tech , please approve again, have updated the process area image accordingly now

aschemmel-tech

fine

masc2023 force-pushed the masc2023_add_initial_tool_management branch from 3242aa0 to af8341c Compare April 15, 2025 09:41

masc2023 marked this pull request as ready for review April 15, 2025 09:48

masc2023 requested a review from aschemmel-tech April 15, 2025 09:48

masc2023 force-pushed the masc2023_add_initial_tool_management branch from af8341c to c0e3042 Compare April 16, 2025 07:03

masc2023 self-assigned this Apr 16, 2025

masc2023 force-pushed the masc2023_add_initial_tool_management branch from c0e3042 to f8a7453 Compare April 16, 2025 08:03

aschemmel-tech requested changes Apr 23, 2025

View reviewed changes

masc2023 force-pushed the masc2023_add_initial_tool_management branch from f8a7453 to 37c6d46 Compare April 25, 2025 10:23

pahmann reviewed Apr 29, 2025

View reviewed changes

docs/platform_management_plan/tool_management.rst Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

pahmann requested changes Apr 29, 2025

View reviewed changes

masc2023 requested review from MaximilianSoerenPollak and mmr1909 April 29, 2025 08:03

masc2023 force-pushed the masc2023_add_initial_tool_management branch 2 times, most recently from ed3fa5e to 4de368a Compare April 29, 2025 10:22

MaximilianSoerenPollak mentioned this pull request Apr 30, 2025

Tooling information collection #1015

Closed

dcalavrezo-qorix reviewed Apr 30, 2025

View reviewed changes

docs/platform_management_plan/tool_management.rst Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

AlexanderLanin previously requested changes Apr 30, 2025

View reviewed changes

aschemmel-tech previously approved these changes Apr 30, 2025

View reviewed changes

masc2023 dismissed aschemmel-tech’s stale review via bd7e53e April 30, 2025 13:55

masc2023 force-pushed the masc2023_add_initial_tool_management branch from 4de368a to bd7e53e Compare April 30, 2025 13:55

aschemmel-tech previously approved these changes May 6, 2025

View reviewed changes

pahmann previously approved these changes May 6, 2025

View reviewed changes

proces: add initial tool management

b1281b2

Resolves: #858

masc2023 dismissed stale reviews from pahmann and aschemmel-tech via b1281b2 May 6, 2025 09:06

masc2023 force-pushed the masc2023_add_initial_tool_management branch from bd7e53e to b1281b2 Compare May 6, 2025 09:06

masc2023 requested review from aschemmel-tech and pahmann May 6, 2025 09:09

aschemmel-tech approved these changes May 6, 2025

View reviewed changes

masc2023 merged commit 90987d2 into main May 6, 2025
11 checks passed

masc2023 deleted the masc2023_add_initial_tool_management branch May 6, 2025 09:18

	\| It will not be filled out but considered during the review and monitoring to complete of the Tool Verification Report.
	\| It will not be filled out, but considered during the review and monitoring to complete of the Tool Verification Report.

		The purpose of the Tool Management Plan is to guide the identification, evaluation and qualification of
		project tools.

		* Make familiar with the development and supporting process descriptions in :ref:`process_description`
		* Make familiar with the relevant sections of the :ref:`Platform Management Plan <pmp>`, here especially with :need:`Tool Management Plan <doc__platform_tool_management_plan>`


		Finally the Tool Verification Report is verified and approved, and thus in Released state.

		For creating the Tool Verification Report a template must be used.

process: add initial tool management #932

process: add initial tool management #932

Uh oh!

Conversation

masc2023 commented Apr 15, 2025

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Apr 15, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

License Check Results

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Apr 15, 2025

Uh oh!

aschemmel-tech left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

aschemmel-tech left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

AlexanderLanin commented Apr 30, 2025

Uh oh!

aschemmel-tech left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

pahmann left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

masc2023 commented May 6, 2025

Uh oh!

aschemmel-tech left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

github-actions bot commented Apr 15, 2025 •

edited

Loading