Fix issues in process requirements #121
Conversation
|
The created documentation from the pull request is available at: docu-html |
| :complies: std_req__iso26262__support_1045 | ||
|
|
||
| Documents headers shall contain an "author" attribute. Every committer who adds more than 50% | ||
| Generic documents headers shall contain an "author" attribute. Every committer who adds more than 50% |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
From mathematical point of you, if 2 authors add exactly 50%, nobody will be an author, so I think this criteria must be redefined
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It's also unclear to us how this is calculated.
How exactly are the 50% defined? Is it per commit? Only when the PR is ready and then all commits together?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
From mathematical point of you, if 2 authors add exactly 50%, nobody will be an author, so I think this criteria must be redefined
Ok, will try a new definition.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It's also unclear to us how this is calculated.
How exactly are the 50% defined? Is it per commit? Only when the PR is ready and then all commits together?
I thought per Document line after the PR merge. Will try to better explain.
| :complies: std_req__iso26262__support_745, std_req__aspice_40__SUP-8-BP8 | ||
|
|
||
| The structured text tool shall check that the Id's of the configuration items are unique. | ||
| The doc-as-code tool shall check that the Id's of the configuration items (documented in doc-as-code) are unique. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This I still don't quiet understand.
Is it the needs in docs-as-code that map to the ones in doc_concept?
So ASPICE_40, ISO26262 etc.?
Or is it something else?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The definition in configuration_concept.rst is: "configuration items are all realizations of defined work products in the project ..." and here we say "which are documented as sphinx-needs". The work products are defined in <process_name_>workproduct.rst files.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
so work products are realized we the need document, having attribute realizes Process_wp_ ...., or doc_tool, they shall have all unique IDs
There was a problem hiding this comment.
So this applies specifically to Generic documents?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Or is it the list from gd_req__config__workproducts_storage?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
So this applies specifically to
Generic documents?
No, all work producs which are realized as needs (Requirements, Architecture, Generic Documents ...)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Or is it the list from
gd_req__config__workproducts_storage?
The Unique ID for files which do not contain needs, like all sources I would not consider here. For me this is the full path name. Honestly I am unsure if we should define a requirement that requires a check that checks for duplicates of SW and tools which we pull from outside the project, avoiding the use of different versions.
aschemmel-tech
force-pushed
the
aschemmel-tech-process-reqs-fixes
branch
3 times, most recently
from
e6aaa88 to
cd108da
Compare
|
@PhilipPartsch : the changes we discussed in the working meeting I ask you to review are in: https://github.com/eclipse-score/process_description/pull/121/files#diff-c709db8b32729a8a7093d751ad2be6ea44129dc63434a7cc371dde6c753be48d |
process/process_areas/documentation_management/guidance/documentation_process_reqs.rst
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Ref: Resolves #117
aschemmel-tech
force-pushed
the
aschemmel-tech-process-reqs-fixes
branch
from
cd108da to
829b021
Compare
Ref: Resolves #117