checks: bugfix id contains feature

[hoe-jo]

• separate feature in single parts
• search for each part individually

[github-actions]

License Check Results

🚀 The license check job ran with the Bazel command:

bazel run //src:license-check

Status: ✅ Passed

Click to expand output

[License Check Output]
Extracting Bazel installation...
Starting local Bazel server and connecting to it...
INFO: Invocation ID: c02be1cb-5d32-4a6f-a6bc-849d4fb6c48f
Computing main repo mapping: 
Computing main repo mapping: 
Computing main repo mapping: 
Computing main repo mapping: 
Loading: 
Loading: 0 packages loaded
Loading: 0 packages loaded
    currently loading: src
Loading: 0 packages loaded
    currently loading: src
Analyzing: target //src:license-check (1 packages loaded, 0 targets configured)
Analyzing: target //src:license-check (1 packages loaded, 0 targets configured)

Analyzing: target //src:license-check (96 packages loaded, 10 targets configured)

Analyzing: target //src:license-check (140 packages loaded, 525 targets configured)

Analyzing: target //src:license-check (148 packages loaded, 1988 targets configured)

Analyzing: target //src:license-check (153 packages loaded, 2652 targets configured)

Analyzing: target //src:license-check (158 packages loaded, 2687 targets configured)

INFO: Analyzed target //src:license-check (163 packages loaded, 4946 targets configured).
[1 / 1] no actions running
INFO: Found 1 target...
Target //src:license.check.license_check up-to-date:
  bazel-bin/src/license.check.license_check
  bazel-bin/src/license.check.license_check.jar
INFO: Elapsed time: 16.294s, Critical Path: 0.38s
INFO: 13 processes: 4 disk cache hit, 9 internal.
INFO: Build completed successfully, 13 total actions
INFO: Running command line: bazel-bin/src/license.check.license_check src/formatted.txt -review -project automotive.score -repo https://github.com/eclipse-score/docs-as-code -token otyhZ4eaRYK1tKLNNF-Y
[main] INFO Querying Eclipse Foundation for license data for 83 items.
[main] INFO Found 58 items.
[main] INFO Querying ClearlyDefined for license data for 25 items.
[main] INFO Found 25 items.
[main] INFO Vetted license information was found for all content. No further investigation is required.

[github-actions]

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

[AlexanderLanin]

I'm not so sure of the intention here. This contradicts requirements in my opinion.

[MaximilianSoerenPollak]

I'm not so sure of the intention here. This contradicts requirements in my opinion.

Is it a 'simple' solution to this? eclipse-score/score#1033

[hoe-jo]

@AlexanderLanin the original text of the requirement is very unspecific, so from my Point of View it is still covered:

"structural element (e.g. some part of the feature tree, component acronym)"

@MaximilianSoerenPollak yes, its a quickfix so that people can start working

[MaximilianSoerenPollak]

Suggested change

	found = any(featurepart.lower() in docname.lower() for featurepart in featureparts)
	found = any(featurepart.lower() in docname.lower() for featurepart in featureparts)

Indent is missing here.

[AlexanderLanin]

So far we always changed the names to match exactly.
What's the example here where this would help?
I guess then the intention will be much more understandable.
This PR will allow "my_component" to match "my", so I'm just not sure of the use case.

e.g. key_value_storage was changed to kvs at eclipse-score/score#1026
e.g. deterministic-app-abstraction-layer was changed to daal at eclipse-score/score#901

[AlexanderLanin]

It would certainly become clearer with documentation and/or tests ;-)

[hoe-jo]

Minutes from Operational Support Meeting:

• Implement first letter abbreviation
• Match whole substring in current implementation

[MaximilianSoerenPollak]

This then means we expect the folders to be seperated by _ right? As we split on that?

If that's the case, fine by me.

[MaximilianSoerenPollak]

Just a note:

This makes initials of number stuff a bit unideal, but I don't mind that.

e.g. aspice 40 => a4

[MaximilianSoerenPollak]

As said though, this is just a note. No need to fix this I would say. For now at least.

[MaximilianSoerenPollak]

Also @hoe-jo You don't need to force push (if you don't want to & did not rebase) as we will squash the PR anyway when merging. So don't worry much bout this.

[MaximilianSoerenPollak]

Ahh, I see that some tests from the RST fails due to use changing that.
Let me see what we need to change there.

[MaximilianSoerenPollak]

@hoe-jo This should be last change, tests should pass then. (Don't forget to format after).

Can you remove these lines from that file in your PR?
https://github.com/eclipse-score/docs-as-code/blob/main/src/extensions/score_metamodel/tests/rst/id_contains_feature/test_id_contains_feature.rst?plain=1#L16-L20

I tested it, and that should do the trick and pass everything.

[MaximilianSoerenPollak]

Rebased to resolve merge conflicts.

Decided in a call, that I fix the issues myself due to time constraints from commiter side.