Skip to content
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.

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

typo in vspec v3.0 makes vss-tools 4.x fail #734

Open
lukasmittag opened this issue Mar 18, 2024 · 2 comments
Open

typo in vspec v3.0 makes vss-tools 4.x fail #734

lukasmittag opened this issue Mar 18, 2024 · 2 comments

Comments

@lukasmittag
Copy link

I found something really interesting in vspec 3.0 there is a typo
Actuator instead of actuator
https://github.com/COVESA/vehicle_signal_specification/blob/525e2bd00ddf061851bdc75e849178e5d3ad5833/spec/Powertrain/Battery.vspec#L229C9-L229C17
and this makes load_tree impossible for vspec definiton 3.0
Suggested fix would be to allow upper and lower case here
https://github.com/COVESA/vss-tools/blob/839b0d087ecb6419372476fb99a7d8c160c7d13b/vspec/model/constants.py#L284C29-L284C30

@erikbosch
Copy link
Collaborator

erikbosch commented Mar 18, 2024

We had a discussion around a year ago to clarify that VSS names are case sensitive, see #569 and as part of that we changed documentation and vss-tools.

So far we have not had any ambition to keep support for older VSS versions in VSS-tools, the assumption has sort of been that you use the VSS-tools version related to the VSS-version you are using. This issue is a good starting point to discuss if we better should change this approach; some alternatives below

  • Should we continue just supporting "latest and greatest VSS version and standard catalog"
  • Should we automatically supporter older supported VSS_version (v3.0 may anyway be too old to be considered supported)
  • Should we explicitly add support for selected older versions; like --version 3.1 to accept 3.1-syntax rather than "latest syntax"

However, supporting older and newer versions in parallel comes at a cost as maintenance and refactoring becomes more complex.

@ppb2020
Copy link
Collaborator

ppb2020 commented Mar 26, 2024

I would not have strong objections to requiring alignment between catalog version and tool version. The main advantages of this would be to reduce testing and simplicity of use.

Otherwise, we could support some form of backwards compatibility, where the latest version of the tools would support older versions of the catalog. This seems onerous and may not be possible in the long term.

With a backwards compatible approach or an approach where one specifies the syntax version, could this instead be done by looking at the existing version entries in the catalog (i.e., Vehicle.VersionVSS)?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants