feat(validate): lifecycle gap names the ASPICE verification chain (REQ-237, #350)#642
Merged
Merged
Conversation
…Q-237, #350) Marking a sw-req implemented and green requires the full ASPICE chain (sw-req <- sw-detail-design <- unit-verification; sw-req <- sw-arch-component <- sw-integration-verification), but the completeness diagnostic only listed "missing: unit-verification, sw-integration-verification". A downstream user (synth) authored a direct `unit-verification verifies: SL-TR-003`, which validate rejected (that link targets sw-detail-design), and had to reverse-engineer the layering from the rejection. Now, for each missing downstream type that cannot link DIRECTLY to the artifact's type, the gap names what it DOES attach to, so the required intermediate is obvious: SL-TR-003 (sw-req, status: implemented) — missing: unit-verification, ... -> a `unit-verification` `verifies` `sw-detail-design`, not `sw-req` directly — add an intermediate `sw-detail-design` that traces to this artifact and is `verifies`-linked by the `unit-verification` A missing type that CAN link directly (e.g. `sw-verification` -> sw-req) gets no hint. Rendered at the CLI display layer (shared by the salsa and --direct paths, so validate/direct parity is preserved — REQ-241). Per the reporter's own ask; keeps the ASPICE layering required (shape B), just guided. Implements: REQ-237 Verifies: REQ-237 Refs: REQ-089 Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
📐 Rivet artifact delta
Graphgraph LR
REQ_237["REQ-237"]:::modified
classDef added fill:#d4edda,stroke:#28a745,color:#155724
classDef removed fill:#f8d7da,stroke:#dc3545,color:#721c24
classDef modified fill:#fff3cd,stroke:#ffc107,color:#856404
classDef overflow fill:#e2e3e5,stroke:#6c757d,color:#495057,stroke-dasharray: 3 3
Modified
Posted by |
![github-actions[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/15368?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
⚠️ Performance Alert ⚠️
Possible performance regression was detected for benchmark 'Rivet Criterion Benchmarks'.
Benchmark result of this commit is worse than the previous benchmark result exceeding threshold 1.20.
| Benchmark suite | Current: 2ca2f3a | Previous: 49b44e5 | Ratio |
|---|---|---|---|
traceability_matrix/1000 |
63114 ns/iter (± 388) |
44678 ns/iter (± 415) |
1.41 |
query/10000 |
336157 ns/iter (± 6579) |
234773 ns/iter (± 2041) |
1.43 |
This comment was automatically generated by workflow using github-action-benchmark.
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. 📢 Thoughts on this report? Let us know! |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What
Closes #350 (Shape B — guide to the chain). Marking a sw-req implemented+verified needs the full ASPICE chain, but the completeness diagnostic only listed
missing: unit-verification, sw-integration-verification— so a downstream user (synth) authored a directunit-verification verifies: <sw-req>, got rejected (that link targets sw-detail-design), and reverse-engineered the layering from the rejection.Fix
For each missing downstream type that cannot link directly to the artifact's type, the gap now names what it does attach to:
A type that CAN link directly (e.g.
sw-verification→sw-req) gets no hint. Keeps the ASPICE layering required — just guided (the reporter's own ask). Rendered at the CLI display layer shared by the salsa and--directpaths, so validate/direct parity (REQ-241) holds.Verification
lifecycle_gap_names_the_aspice_verification_chainasserts the chain hint on a real aspice sw-req. cli_commands 150 green; clippy--all-targetsclean.🤖 Generated with Claude Code