wip #200

AlexanderLanin · 2025-08-11T07:45:25Z

unrelated stuff:

metamodel requirement -> discuss with process team
requirements table -> align internally
integration.md -> totally unrelated

github-actions · 2025-08-11T07:46:37Z

License Check Results

🚀 The license check job ran with the Bazel command:

bazel run //src:license-check

Status: ⚠️ Needs Review

Click to expand output

[License Check Output]
Extracting Bazel installation...
Starting local Bazel server (8.3.0) and connecting to it...
INFO: Invocation ID: f8abd818-e231-4e1a-9407-3fc4c30a59ab
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
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 (69 packages loaded, 9 targets configured)

Analyzing: target //src:license-check (69 packages loaded, 9 targets configured)

Analyzing: target //src:license-check (117 packages loaded, 2236 targets configured)

Analyzing: target //src:license-check (121 packages loaded, 2363 targets configured)

INFO: Analyzed target //src:license-check (129 packages loaded, 4428 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: 14.916s, Critical Path: 0.44s
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 <args omitted>
[main] INFO Querying Eclipse Foundation for license data for 84 items.
[main] INFO Found 58 items.
[main] INFO Querying ClearlyDefined for license data for 26 items.
[main] ERROR Error response from ClearlyDefined 524

github-actions · 2025-08-11T07:49:19Z

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

opajonk · 2025-08-20T10:49:48Z

integration.md

+
+The subset is explicit rather than dynamically inferred. Tests in it should fail quickly
+when contracts or shared schemas drift. If the list grows until it is slow it will
+either be disabled or ignored; regular curation keeps it useful.


disabling/ignoring should be impossible for anyone who is not an administrator. The passing of the subset must be a pre-requisite to even "enabling the merge button".

Yeah, I was thinking of empowered developers. The other alternative would simply be extreme inefficiency in development. Not better, just a different hell.

opajonk · 2025-08-20T10:51:34Z

integration.md

+### Coordinated Multi-Repository Subset
+Some changes require multiple repositories to move together (for example a schema
+evolution, a cross-cutting refactor, a protocol tightening). We mark related pull
+requests using a stable mechanism such as a common label (e.g. changeset:feature-x). The


How about simply using the same HEAD branch name to identify a changeset? We had reasonable experience with that. If combined with draft PRs, it is even possible to automatically create "downstream" PRs (e.g. in the integration repository) since in that case also the intended BASE branch is known.

Yeah sure. Labels are just an example here. Alignment of branch names might be more complex across different modules and different companies. And forks.

opajonk · 2025-08-20T10:57:47Z

integration.md

+back to each pull request. None merge until the coordinated set is green. This removes
+informal merge ordering as a coordination mechanism.
+
+### Post-Merge Full Suite


IMHO it would be very nice if that could be avoided, but maybe it cannot - sure. However, I would introduce it only when the splitting of pre- and post-merge is really required, i.e. when the "WTFs/min" mentioned by developers are getting too high ;-)

One more remark: it may be that merge queues can help. We have seen that it can work very well to have "cheap, often failing" tests run on PR push, and run "expensive, seldomly failing" tests in the merge queue. That way, people can click merge, go home, expect that they are "usually done". Merge queue does "the rest". Only in rare cases where the cheap tests have missed something, the queue will fail. Well, OK - fine. Fix it, write a cheap regression test so that it does not happen again - move on.

Based on the scope of the project, we'll not manage to keep tests fast enough to run all of them pre-merge. There will be slow system image generation or HW tests.

GitHub merge queues I have not included in the concept. Let's investigate how exactly they fit in. AFAIK they are pre-merge as well and simply combine multiple PRs?

opajonk · 2025-08-20T10:58:31Z

integration.md

+
+Large configuration belongs elsewhere; manifests should stay readable and diffable.
+
+## Example: GitHub Actions (Conceptual)


Interesting example, thanks for that!

opajonk · 2025-08-20T11:01:55Z

integration.md

+SHAs if multiple components advanced). On success we append a record for the tuple with
+a manifest hash and timing data.
+
+### Manifests


I am not a huge Bazel fan but - in S-CORE we should be able to use Bazel lockfiles here?

I'm not sure we can/should mess with lock files. I was thinking of adding git_override statements like this

docs-as-code/src/tests/test_consumer.py

Lines 187 to 199 in 6970b40

def replace_bazel_dep_with_git_override(

module_content: str, git_hash: str, gh_url: str

) -> str:

pattern = r'bazel_dep\(name = "score_docs_as_code", version = "[^"]+"\)'

replacement = f'''bazel_dep(name = "score_docs_as_code", version = "0.0.0")

git_override(

module_name = "score_docs_as_code",

remote = "{gh_url}",

commit = "{git_hash}"

)'''

return re.sub(pattern, replacement, module_content)

wip

0fd9bcd

github-project-automation bot added this to Infrastructure Aug 11, 2025

github-project-automation bot moved this to Draft in Infrastructure Aug 11, 2025

AlexanderLanin added 15 commits August 13, 2025 13:54

wip

192f25a

wip

e46f6cc

github v1

5117267

style rewrite

775913c

rfc comment

b97d083

simplify out of scope section

aa8034a

improve rfc wording

8d53bb1

merge some chapters

632addb

auto format

c540786

review feedback Max

9978a5d

fix special char

105430f

add image

3050bce

mermaid in dark mode attempt

75deb7d

mermaid: use default style

249b80b

mermaid: fix wording

27b3f33

opajonk reviewed Aug 20, 2025

View reviewed changes

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Uh oh!

wip #200

wip #200

Uh oh!

AlexanderLanin commented Aug 11, 2025 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Aug 11, 2025 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Aug 11, 2025

Uh oh!

opajonk Aug 20, 2025

Uh oh!

AlexanderLanin Aug 20, 2025

Uh oh!

opajonk Aug 20, 2025

Uh oh!

AlexanderLanin Aug 20, 2025

Uh oh!

opajonk Aug 20, 2025

Uh oh!

AlexanderLanin Aug 20, 2025

Uh oh!

opajonk Aug 20, 2025

Uh oh!

opajonk Aug 20, 2025

Uh oh!

AlexanderLanin Aug 20, 2025

Uh oh!

Uh oh!


		Large configuration belongs elsewhere; manifests should stay readable and diffable.

		## Example: GitHub Actions (Conceptual)

	def replace_bazel_dep_with_git_override(
	module_content: str, git_hash: str, gh_url: str
	) -> str:
	pattern = r'bazel_dep\(name = "score_docs_as_code", version = "[^"]+"\)'

	replacement = f'''bazel_dep(name = "score_docs_as_code", version = "0.0.0")
	git_override(
	module_name = "score_docs_as_code",
	remote = "{gh_url}",
	commit = "{git_hash}"
	)'''

	return re.sub(pattern, replacement, module_content)

wip #200

Are you sure you want to change the base?

wip #200

Uh oh!

Conversation

AlexanderLanin commented Aug 11, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Aug 11, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

License Check Results

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Aug 11, 2025

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

AlexanderLanin commented Aug 11, 2025 •

edited

Loading

github-actions bot commented Aug 11, 2025 •

edited

Loading