Skip to content

Define component requirements for bitmanipulation library #1727

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom
Merged
antonkri merged 1 commit into from
Oct 9, 2025
Merged

Define component requirements for bitmanipulation library #1727

antonkri merged 1 commit into from
Oct 9, 2025

Conversation

@Rutik7
Copy link
Contributor

@Rutik7 Rutik7 commented Sep 15, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Fixes #1719

@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Sep 15, 2025

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

masc2023
masc2023 reviewed Sep 15, 2025
View reviewed changes
docs/features/baselibs/docs/requirements/index.rst
Copy link
Contributor

@masc2023 masc2023 Sep 15, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Please add also here header, like for component requirements, but realizeses PROCESS_wp__requirements_feature
.. document:: Bit Manipulation Requirements
🆔 doc__bitmanipulation_requirements
:status: draft
:safety: ASIL_B
:realizes: PROCESS_wp__requirements_feature
:tags: requirements, bitmanipulation

Copy link
Contributor Author

@Rutik7 Rutik7 Sep 17, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I guess there is no need to add one more section for bitmanipulation. feat_req__baselibs__bitmanipulation this ID is already there , and also we did not use "doc__bitmanipulation_requirements" this ID any where else. please let me know if that required . Thank You!

Copy link
Member

@4og 4og Sep 22, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@masc2023, The document need is indeed missing in the feature requirements. Let's have it fixed in a separate PR. I created an issue #1775.

FScholPer
FScholPer previously approved these changes Sep 19, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@FScholPer FScholPer left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Makes sense to me to add that missing piece.

4og
4og approved these changes Sep 22, 2025
View reviewed changes
docs/features/baselibs/docs/requirements/index.rst
Copy link
Member

@4og 4og Sep 22, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@masc2023, The document need is indeed missing in the feature requirements. Let's have it fixed in a separate PR. I created an issue #1775.

aschemmel-tech
aschemmel-tech requested changes Sep 23, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@aschemmel-tech aschemmel-tech left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

see inline comments

4og
4og reviewed Sep 30, 2025
View reviewed changes
@Rutik7 Rutik7 force-pushed the ra/comp_requirement_Bitmanipulation branch from 602f440 to f1ab822 Compare October 7, 2025 08:03
@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Oct 7, 2025

⚠️ Docs-as-Code version mismatch detected
Please check the CI build logs for details and align the documentation version with the Bazel dependency.

@Rutik7 Rutik7 force-pushed the ra/comp_requirement_Bitmanipulation branch from f1ab822 to be192a6 Compare October 7, 2025 08:25
aschemmel-tech
aschemmel-tech previously approved these changes Oct 8, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@aschemmel-tech aschemmel-tech left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Fine with changes

antonkri
antonkri previously approved these changes Oct 9, 2025
View reviewed changes
FScholPer
FScholPer previously approved these changes Oct 9, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@FScholPer FScholPer left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good

@Rutik7 Rutik7 dismissed stale reviews from FScholPer, antonkri, and aschemmel-tech via da4b674 October 9, 2025 08:50
@Rutik7 Rutik7 force-pushed the ra/comp_requirement_Bitmanipulation branch from be192a6 to da4b674 Compare October 9, 2025 08:50
@antonkri antonkri self-requested a review October 9, 2025 10:20
@antonkri antonkri merged commit deeffc2 into eclipse-score:main Oct 9, 2025
6 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@masc2023 masc2023 masc2023 left review comments

@4og 4og 4og approved these changes

@antonkri antonkri antonkri approved these changes

@FScholPer FScholPer FScholPer left review comments

@aschemmel-tech aschemmel-tech aschemmel-tech left review comments

@qor-lb qor-lb Awaiting requested review from qor-lb qor-lb is a code owner

@johannes-esr johannes-esr Awaiting requested review from johannes-esr johannes-esr is a code owner

@markert-r markert-r Awaiting requested review from markert-r

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Define component requirements for bitmanipulation library

6 participants

@Rutik7 @4og @antonkri @masc2023 @FScholPer @aschemmel-tech