WIP: process overview and status by antonkri · Pull Request #675 · eclipse-score/process_description

antonkri · 2026-05-06T09:29:14Z

No description provided.

…s.rst substitutions

masc2023

github-actions · 2026-05-06T11:53:01Z

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

masc2023

Looks good, but not sure, if all information is on the right place, better in score, let's discuss it tomorrow in the process community meeting to get feedback

PandaeDo

I would also appriciate if we can have a introduction for that. For example I didn't get the point in "Process Area Overview" why we are green in "Process req. status". There are some requriements still open. So this might be a litte bit confusing when you don't take the tag into account. I would say that only "done_automation" shall pay into the direction of completed. By the way this would be a helpful tool support for a current task that we have.

pahmann

As this PR is still marked as WIP, here are some points I will check later when it is no longer WIP

This change set is not clear due to its size, see where things can be split.
It introduces styles, diagrams, links to score features and tools. Split the PR in logical parts at least by proper dependent commits or independent PRs when reasonable.
The 5 commit messages are not good clusters to follow the logical flow. Modify commits that they guide through the desired change.
No description is provided to motivate details in the Pull Request, so add a description.
The title of the pull request is very generic, let it describe the change.
There is link to other repo elements, but we are not linking to score or other repos to keep the process independent from the implementation.

As it is WIP, I assume all this will be reflected and anyway be worked on.

…s_status Add two new module columns to all 5 Process Area tracker tables: - Lifecycle (eclipse-score/lifecycle, #909): PA3 feat_arc 🔄94%, comp_arc 🔄94%, code ✅, unit+comp_int tests ✅, detailed design 🔄50% - Security/Crypto (eclipse-score/inc_security_crypto, #905): feat_req ✅(42/42), all other deliverables ❌ Open Updated implementation status lines: - PA1: 7/7 → 9/9 ✅ - PA2: 29%→26% (7/27) - PA3: 24%→19% (5/27) - PA4: 50%→47% (17/36) - PA5: 36%→33% (12/36) Updated SKILL.md: module table, known CRs, description, RST snapshot

masc2023

@antonkri , we discussed that in process community, meeting, your contribution should be in reference_integration, this is not the correct repo, and in addition, in each module

…eliverables as columns

…ion after table transpose

…les found) Unit test counts per module: - Baselibs: 395, Communication: 227, Logging: 63, Orchestrator/Lifecycle: 3 - Persistency: 14, Time: 46, Config Mgmt: 19 Comp. integration test counts: - Baselibs: 1, Communication: 44, Orchestrator/Lifecycle: 7, Time: 3 (was incorrectly ❌) Security/Crypto tests are placeholder stubs (test_main.cpp tests inline add()) → stays ❌ Open PA5 status: 33% → 36% (13/36) due to Time comp-int fix

antonkri · 2026-05-08T10:50:42Z

@masc2023 yes, agree. I will move it.

Count TEST()/TEST_F()/TEST_P() macros, def test_() functions, and #[test] attributes across all module repos: - Baselibs: 4,663 unit / 13 comp-int - Communication: 2,374 unit / 42 comp-int - Logging: 619 unit / 0 comp-int - Orchestrator: 2 unit / 9 comp-int (eclipse-score/lifecycle repo) - Persistency: 138 unit / 0 comp-int - Time: 296 unit / 11 comp-int - Config Mgmt: 143 unit / 0 comp-int - Lifecycle: 2 unit / 9 comp-int (eclipse-score/lifecycle repo) - Security/Crypto: open (placeholder stubs only)

LOC counted from source files (excl. tests, docs, mocks): - Baselibs: ~119,400 LOC - Communication: ~71,300 LOC - Logging: ~22,900 LOC - Orchestrator: ~38,300 LOC (shared lifecycle repo) - Persistency: ~8,700 LOC - Time: ~11,700 LOC - Config Mgmt: ~5,400 LOC - Lifecycle: ~38,300 LOC (shared lifecycle repo) - Security/Crypto: no src yet

…o PA5 Logging: 1 test (test_remote_logging) Orchestrator: 3 tests (test_orchestration_with_persistency, test_showcases, test_ssh) Persistency: 6 tests (test_orchestration_with_persistency, test_multiple_kvs_per_app) Tests are cross-module, maintained in eclipse-score/reference_integration. Added footnote explaining the cross-module nature.

Replace [*] footnote notation with inline '(cross-module)' label. Fixes: WARNING: Footnote [*] is not referenced. [ref.footnote]

RolandJentschETAS

The information is great but it is in the wrong repository. The process repository is the base of all repos and the other repositories are linked to it. With this change we add an dependency to the module repos and therefore have a cyclic link between the repos. So this change should be done in the reference integration repository.

…bility

…-rule - Add 'Static Code Analysis' column to Process Area 5 table (before Module Verification Report) with per-module CI findings: Baselibs/Config Mgmt: clang-tidy 0 findings Orchestrator/Persistency/Lifecycle: Clippy 0 findings Communication: configured (clang-tidy + CodeQL/MISRA) but no CI enforcement yet Logging/Time/Security: open Add note block explaining zero-tolerance CI principle and central CodeQL in reference_integration - Update PA2 Lifecycle row: replace incorrect 'Open' with explicit progress counts: Feature Requirements: 0% (0/92) - all 92 entries status: invalid Component Requirements: 0% (0/1) - template placeholder in health_monitor - Update SKILL.md: - Add PA5 Static Code Analysis section with status criteria, per-module table, and CodeQL note - Clarify 0%-rule: elements exist but all invalid -> 0% (0/N), never 'Open'; applies to Feature/Component Req, Feature/Component Arch, Detailed Design for ALL modules consistently - Update Limitations section for static analysis nuances

- Add 'Dynamic Code Analysis' column between Static Code Analysis and Module Verification Report in Process Area 5 - Baselibs: 0 findings (ASan/UBSan/LSan via sanitizers_linux.yml) - Communication: 0 findings (ASan/UBSan/LSan + TSan, both on main green) - All other modules: Open (no sanitizer CI workflow found) - Update note block to explain sanitizer CI zero-tolerance principle - Update implementation status: 36% (23/63 deliverables complete) - Update SKILL.md: add PA5 Dynamic Code Analysis section with status criteria, per-module table, and detection guidance

…de screens Add wide-content-page body class via raw HTML injection and corresponding CSS rule to remove the 60em max-width cap on the bd-article-container for that page only. This prevents the large empty margins on wide/external monitors while leaving all other pages unaffected.

antonkri added 4 commits April 23, 2026 07:56

Add Process Status Overview page with tooling columns

9e422f8

Split process status overview into three separate table files

8805ada

Restore single combined table; tooling columns via tooling_definition…

13687dc

…s.rst substitutions

WIP

b236a9c

antonkri requested review from PandaeDo, aschemmel-tech, masc2023 and pahmann as code owners May 6, 2026 09:29

antonkri added the invalid This doesn't seem right label May 6, 2026

antonkri changed the title ~~Ankr process overview~~ WIP: process overview and status May 6, 2026

masc2023 reviewed May 6, 2026

View reviewed changes

antonkri force-pushed the ankr_process_overview branch 2 times, most recently from 6d5901a to f39a898 Compare May 6, 2026 11:49

masc2023 requested changes May 6, 2026

View reviewed changes

PandaeDo reviewed May 6, 2026

View reviewed changes

pahmann requested changes May 6, 2026

View reviewed changes

antonkri force-pushed the ankr_process_overview branch 4 times, most recently from 2aac9e5 to 87b39aa Compare May 7, 2026 11:51

tables for process are in a good shape

d2fb752

antonkri force-pushed the ankr_process_overview branch from 87b39aa to d2fb752 Compare May 7, 2026 12:36

masc2023 requested changes May 8, 2026

View reviewed changes

antonkri added 3 commits May 8, 2026 10:30

refactor: transpose implementation status tables — modules as rows, d…

349af03

…eliverables as columns

docs(skill): fix 'add a column' → 'add a row' for new module instruct…

4c302e6

…ion after table transpose

antonkri added 4 commits May 8, 2026 10:55

feat: add repo links to Code column in PA4 table

b244e51

style: remove trailing newline in custom.css

6798cbe

antonkri force-pushed the ankr_process_overview branch from 8a58f99 to e369c45 Compare May 10, 2026 18:46

fix: remove unreferenced RST footnote [*] causing CI warning

4bb447a

Replace [*] footnote notation with inline '(cross-module)' label. Fixes: WARNING: Footnote [*] is not referenced. [ref.footnote]

antonkri force-pushed the ankr_process_overview branch from e369c45 to 4bb447a Compare May 10, 2026 18:53

RolandJentschETAS requested changes May 11, 2026

View reviewed changes

docs: increase process status pie chart size to 840px for better visi…

daf825a

…bility

antonkri force-pushed the ankr_process_overview branch from f3b369b to daf825a Compare May 12, 2026 08:26

antonkri added 3 commits May 13, 2026 12:29

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

WIP: process overview and status#675

WIP: process overview and status#675
antonkri wants to merge 19 commits into
mainfrom
ankr_process_overview

antonkri commented May 6, 2026

Uh oh!

masc2023 left a comment

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented May 6, 2026

Uh oh!

masc2023 left a comment

Uh oh!

PandaeDo left a comment

Uh oh!

pahmann left a comment •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

masc2023 left a comment

Uh oh!

antonkri commented May 8, 2026

Uh oh!

RolandJentschETAS left a comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

5 participants

Conversation

antonkri commented May 6, 2026

Uh oh!

masc2023 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented May 6, 2026

Uh oh!

masc2023 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

PandaeDo left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

pahmann left a comment • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

masc2023 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

antonkri commented May 8, 2026

Uh oh!

RolandJentschETAS left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

5 participants

pahmann left a comment •

edited

Loading