Repository navigation
improvement update test levels - #853
Merged
pahmann merged 14 commits intoNov 3, 2026
Merged
Conversation
RolandJentschETAS
requested review from
PandaeDo,
aschemmel-tech,
masc2023 and
pahmann
as code owners
October 29, 2026 13:39
|
The created documentation from the pull request is available at: docu-html |
pahmann
reviewed
Oct 30, 2026
pahmann
requested changes
Nov 3, 2026
| * Interface Test (interface-test) | ||
| * Requirements-based Test (requirements-based) | ||
| * Resource Usage Evaluation (resource-usage) | ||
| * Requirements-based Test (requirements-based): unit, component, feature, platform -> for testing functional, process, tool or other non-functional requirements which are not resource-related (units have no requirements of their own, but unit tests can verify component or feature requirements) |
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do you want to keep the part with "->" as additional explanation or is this maybe already covered in the "quick guide"
| * Analysis of equivalence classes (equivalence-classes): all levels -> for interfaces, interface requirements or functional requirements containing values; can be combined with boundary-values | ||
| * Fuzz testing (fuzz-testing): unit, component, feature -> for interfaces, interface requirements or functional requirements containing values which are tested with random values | ||
| * Error guessing based on knowledge or experience (error-guessing): all levels -> for testing known error-prone areas; applicable for all test types | ||
| * Explorative testing (explorative-testing): feature, platform -> for exploring the system and its boundaries without predefined test cases |
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You could consider to use the statement from another section also here instead of "->"
Allowed values for *TestType* and *DerivationTechnique* and a short guide when to use which are available in the :ref:`verification_quick_guide`. Multiple values can be given for both.
…ds.rst Co-authored-by: Philipp Ahmann <2428012+pahmann@users.noreply.github.com> Signed-off-by: RolandJentschETAS <135332348+RolandJentschETAS@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Philipp Ahmann <2428012+pahmann@users.noreply.github.com> Signed-off-by: RolandJentschETAS <135332348+RolandJentschETAS@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Philipp Ahmann <2428012+pahmann@users.noreply.github.com> Signed-off-by: RolandJentschETAS <135332348+RolandJentschETAS@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Philipp Ahmann <2428012+pahmann@users.noreply.github.com> Signed-off-by: RolandJentschETAS <135332348+RolandJentschETAS@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Philipp Ahmann <2428012+pahmann@users.noreply.github.com> Signed-off-by: RolandJentschETAS <135332348+RolandJentschETAS@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Philipp Ahmann <2428012+pahmann@users.noreply.github.com> Signed-off-by: RolandJentschETAS <135332348+RolandJentschETAS@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Philipp Ahmann <2428012+pahmann@users.noreply.github.com> Signed-off-by: RolandJentschETAS <135332348+RolandJentschETAS@users.noreply.github.com>
pahmann
approved these changes
Nov 3, 2026
4 of 6 tasks
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This pull request updates the requirements and guidance for linking tests to requirements and clarifies the allowed metadata for test cases at different verification levels. The main changes include stricter definitions for test metadata, explicit mapping of allowed link types per test level, and updates to documentation to ensure consistency across the verification process.
Process requirements and metadata guidance updates:
Linking Requirements to TestsandVerification Documentation Checksrequirements (gd_req__verification_link_testsandgd_req__verification_checks) are updated to version 2, reflecting stricter and more detailed guidance for linking tests to requirements. [1] [2]TestTypeandDerivationTechniquenow specify which test levels (unit, component, feature, platform) each value applies to, and fields may contain multiple comma-separated values.Verifieslinks are now explicitly defined for each test level, determined by folder structure, and minimum coverage requirements are enforced for each level.Documentation and workflow consistency:
gd_req__verification_link_testsrequirement, ensuring process consistency. [1] [2] [3] [4]