[PATCH] eng: Add design group requirement item type

[Chris Johns]

On 15/1/21 4:13 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
> On 15/01/2021 04:31, Chris Johns wrote:
> 
>> On 14/1/21 4:04 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
>>> On 14/01/2021 03:34, Chris Johns wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 13/1/21 9:40 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
>>>>> +Design Group Requirement Item Type
>>>>> +^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>>>> +
>>>>> +This type refines the :ref:`SpecTypeNonFunctionalRequirementItemType` through
>>>>> +the ``non-functional-type`` attribute if the value is ``design-group``. This
>>>>> +set of attributes specifies a design group requirement.  Design group
>>>>> +requirements have an explicit reference to the associated Doxygen group
>>>>> +specified by the ``identifier`` attribute.  Design group requirements have an
>>>>> +implicit validation by inspection method.  The qualification toolchain shall
>>>>> +perform the inspection and check that the specified Doxygen group exists
>>>>> in the
>>>>> +software source code. All explicit attributes shall be specified. The
>>>>> explicit
>>>>> +attributes for this type are:
>>>> Could you please explain the links between doxygen and the spec files? Are
>>>> there
>>>> other link for other reasons?
>>> What do you mean with links? There are no URL references between Doxygen and the
>>> specification if this is what you mean. The design group items are necessary to
>>> place header files which only contain API elements into implementation groups.
>>> An example is <rtems/rtems/part.h>. This header file should not be included by
>>> the user directly, however, the header file itself contains only API elements.
>>> It is in the RTEMSImplClassicPartition group:
>>>
>>> https://git.rtems.org/rtems/tree/cpukit/include/rtems/rtems/part.h#n6
>>>
>>> This group is specified by:
>>>
>>> https://git.rtems.org/rtems-central/tree/spec/rtems/part/req/group.yml
>>>
>> Oh, is this is use when generating the API header?
> Yes, this is used to generate the API header. You need a specification item for
> everything in the generated file.

Thanks and sorry for my misunderstanding. I was thinking of the other direction
for the relationship.

The change is fine.

Chris