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

Standardization of Command Responses #128

Open
3 tasks done
dmknutsen opened this issue Jun 5, 2024 · 0 comments · May be fixed by #129
Open
3 tasks done

Standardization of Command Responses #128

dmknutsen opened this issue Jun 5, 2024 · 0 comments · May be fixed by #129

Comments

@dmknutsen
Copy link
Contributor

Checklist (Please check before submitting)

  • I reviewed the Contributing Guide.
  • I reviewed the README file to see if the feature is in the major future work.
  • I performed a cursory search to see if the feature request is relevant, not redundant, nor in conflict with other tickets.

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
cFS should have standardized command responses for commands that set a state/mode like enable/disable, on/off, true/false, start/stop/pause/resume, etc.

For those commands, the app should respond as describe below:

If the current setting is not in that commanded state,
    If the commanded state can be set successfully,
    a. Increment the command counter
    b. Send an INFO event that says command successfully executed
    otherwise,
    a. Increment the command error counter
    b. Send an ERROR event that says failed to execute the command

If the current setting is already in that commanded state,
    Increment the command counter, not command error counter
    Send an INFO event that says already in that state

The following command response does not align with the standard:

Successful execution of DS_RESET_CMD_EID command - event is of debug type

Describe the solution you'd like
Update logic to align with the standard.

Requester Info
Dan Knutsen
NASA Goddard

thnkslprpt added a commit to thnkslprpt/DS that referenced this issue Jun 8, 2024
@thnkslprpt thnkslprpt linked a pull request Jun 8, 2024 that will close this issue
2 tasks
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

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

1 participant