Meeting Minutes - Tech Lead Sync

[johannes-esr]

General Discussion for all Meeting Minutes

[johannes-esr]

2025-02-26

Participants

@johannes-esr
@markert-r
@qor-lb
@antonkri

Meeting Minutes

• New weekly timeslot: Wednesday 9 - 10am, @johannes-esr to ask @FScholPer to invite
• Planning Concept:
  • Milestones are Issues of the type 'Milestone' -> @johannes-esr to add this issue type
  • Milestones only have sub-issues of the type 'Epic' -> @johannes-esr to add this issue type
  • Epics have sub-issues of the type Task

[johannes-esr]

2025-02-28

Participants

@johannes-esr
@markert-r
@vinodreddy-g
@antonkri
@FScholPer

Meeting Minutes

• Additional weekly slot: Friday, 1:30 - 2:30pm -> @FScholPer to invite
• @markert-r to schedule meeting for March 20 for new interested companies
• New agenda points for PL Circle:
  • Date of Townhall
  • Combination of https://eclipse-score.github.io/ & https://eclipse-score.github.io/score/main/ to allow next step of Contribution One Pager

[johannes-esr]

2025-03-06

Participants

@pahmann
@antonkri
@FScholPer
@johannes-esr

Agenda

• Breakdown of first to Milestones in Epics

Meeting Minutes

• Milestone: Process & Tools Enable Development
  • Epic: (Initial) Processes Requirements #581
  • Epic: (Initial) Tooling Requirements & Architecture #582
  • Epic: (Initial) Processes Detailed Design, Implementation #583
  • Epic: (Initial) Tooling Detailed Design, Implementation, Unit Verification #584
• Milestone: S-CORE v0.5 Modules Buildable
  • Epic: (Initial) Set-up basic repository & build infrastructure #585
  • Epic: LoLa buildable & existing tests runnable #586
  • Epic: Logging buildable & existing tests runnable #587
  • Epic: Persistency buildable & existing tests runnable #588
  • Epic: FEO buildable & existing tests runnable #589
  • Epic: ITF buildable & existing tests runnable #590
  • Epic: (Initial) Coding Guidelines C++ #591
  • Epic: (Initial) Coding Guidelines Rust #592
  • Epic: (Initial) Coding Guidelines Python #593
• Tasks for Communities / CFTs:
  • All existing issues which are matching to the Epics of the Milestone shall be attached
  • Add Milestone to all linked Issues

[antonkri]

2025-03-07

Participants

@johannes-esr
@antonkri
@vinodreddy-g
@FScholPer

Agenda

• Breakdown further Milestones

Meeting Minutes

• Milestone: Reference Integration Linux

  • Epic: Linux container x86_64 is up and running
    Acceptance criterias: Linux container (x86_64) is prepared, configured properly (ethernet/ssh access) and uploaded to some location, that is accessible from local builds and CI.
  • Epic: Linux container arm64 is up and running
    Acceptance criterias: Linux container (arm64) is prepared, configured properly (ethernet/ssh access) and uploaded to some location, that is accessible from local builds and CI.
  • Epic: ITF framework is up & running.
    Acceptance criterias: ITF framework is integrated into bazel. ITF test job is set-up in CI and is part of check/gate pipeline. ITF can establish ssh connection to the image. As first test in the CI pipeline, ITF should deploy application under test to the Linux container and ensure, that this one is running.
  • Epic: ITF framework dlt support
    Acceptance criterias: ITF framework can receive dlt streams from the applications and provides infrastructure to evaluate DLT logs in runtime and post-mortem.

• Milestone: QNX Support

  • Epic: Integration of QNX toolchain.
    Acceptance criterias: QNX 8 toolchain is integrated into bazel. Users need to get the license from QNX everywhere program and put it some specific location for being able to use QNX 8 toolchain.
  • Epic: Building with QNX in CI.
    Acceptance criterias: CI jobs for building of applications are set-up for all currently existing applications and documentation is provided how set-up QNX CI jobs for future applications. QNX CI license is stored as GitHub Secret and allows unlimited execution of QNX CI jobs in parallel
  • Epic: QNX Compiler config.
    Acceptance Criteria: compiler config is agreed with Process team and compiler/linker flags are chosen to support ASIL development right from the beginning.

• Milestone: Reference integration QNX

  • Epic: Qemu with QNX image and x86 BSP
    Acceptance Criteria: Qemu with QNX image, x86 BSP and S-CORE applications can be built with bazel locally and in CI. There exist a voting CI job, that builds QNX Qemu image and executes all existing ITF tests with it.
  • Epic: Qemu with QNX image and Qualcomm (ARM) BSP
    Acceptance Criteria: Qemu with QNX image, Qualcomm BSP and S-CORE applications can be built with bazel locally and on demand on CI.

[johannes-esr]

2025-03-14

Participants

• @johannes-esr
• @antonkri
• @qor-lb
• @vinodreddy-g
• @markert-r

Agenda

• How to do further planning?

Meeting Minutes

• Meeting this afternoon to update PMP with information decided on https://github.com/orgs/eclipse-score/discussions/434#discussioncomment-12299310 & https://github.com/orgs/eclipse-score/discussions/434#discussioncomment-12445705
  • Breakdown of Workpackages
  • Labels to use
  • ...

[johannes-esr]

2025-03-19

Participants

@johannes-esr
@markert-r
@antonkri
@timkl7
@qor-lb

Meeting Minutes

• Next week alignment meeting regarding Processes & Tools between AUTOSAR & S-CORE in Lüneburg, https://www.autosar.org/news-events/detail?tx_news_pi1%5Baction%5D=detail&tx_news_pi1%5Bcontroller%5D=News&tx_news_pi1%5Bnews%5D=304&cHash=a20923b48d9e091adb600c148ab6948f
  • @AlexanderLanin will attend the meeting
  • @antonkri to check if @aschemmel-tech will attend, too
• Proposal: TL Meeting on 31th March 2025, 9:00 - 12:30
  • Planning/Review of Milestones ending in June 2025, too much in parallel
• Tasks for next meeting:
  • Review of Milestone planning; some Epics are not assigned to a CFT/Community
• Change of Monday Meeting Series:
  • 9 - 10am only TL
  • 10 - 11am TL & Communities & CFTs
  • @qor-lb changed invitation, to check if everybody received the updated invitation

[johannes-esr]

2025-03-21

Participants

@johannes-esr
@FScholPer
@qor-lb
@antonkri

Agenda

• Open points from last discussion

Meeting Minutes

• AUTOSAR / S-CORE Meeting: @aschemmel-tech can just attend online
• TL Workshop: March 28, starting 12 pm (instead of March 31)
• Should Safety Linux be a target platform of S-CORE? -> To be addressed in PL Circle @antonkri
• Point for next PL Circle: Analysis AUTOSAR -> @antonkri

[qor-lb]

2025-03-24

Participants

• Tom Fleischmann
• Rebecca Markert
• Anton Kiroborodov
• Frank Scholter Peres
• Lars Bauhofer

Agenda

1. Current Status S-CORE Logo
2. Agenda for WS on 28th
3. Feedback productivity Tech Lead Sync

Meeting Minutes

to 1.

• An agenda of SteerCo but not update yet

to 2.
Proposals to be prepared until friday:

• More concrete milestone/roadmap planning - @antonkri / @markert-r
  • do we have all the dependencies?
  • how to get a better overview?
• Definition of meeting structure - @markert-r
  • who prepares the meeting?
  • what agenda is discussed
  • How to pass tasks between teams #410,
• How to contribute/how are feature requests managed? - @TomFleischmann / @qor-lb
  • Feature requests are prepared to reflect technical roadmap
  • Case A: FR open but no contributions yet (Feature is on roadmap but not implemented)
  • Case B: Feature not yet on roadmap (functionality not yet targeted by by S-CORE)
• Management of components within S-CORE (who can review & merge) - @FScholPer

misc:

• https://oss-review-toolkit.org/ort/

[qor-lb]

2025-03-26

Participants

• Tom Fleischmann
• Rebecca Markert
• Anton Kiroborodov
• Lars Bauhofer

Agenda

1. Slides for townhall
2. Move invite from zoom to teams

Meeting Minutes

to 1.

1. Welcome and Introduction - 5 min
2. Project Vision - 10 min - @markert-r
   - Goal S-CORE: source code standardization
3. Current Status & Overview Cross Functional Teams - 40 min
   • Content Tech - 20 min - @qor-lb
     • 0.5 components & how they were selected - i.e. Architecture WS, Selection Criteria, Components
     • Hint to 1.0 definitions in following months
   • Content Process & Tools - 20 min - @markert-r
     • Current status process - 5 min
     • Results from ekxida - 15 min
4. Roadmap (milestones) - 10 min - @FScholPer
5. How to contribute - 5min - @qor-lb
   - (CFT's & work structure)
6. Q&A - 20 min

to 2.

• accepted

misc:

• Preliminary slides: 20250320_S-CORE_Townhall_Meeting.pptx
• Community days slides:

[johannes-esr]

2025-03-28

Participants

• @johannes-esr
• @qor-lb
• @markert-r
• @antonkri
• @FScholPer

Meeting Minutes

• docs: improved how to contribute section #776
• Review of Roadmap Planning
• Tasks for Monday Meeting:
  • https://github.com/eclipse-score/score/milestone/7 -> Status to be checked with Infrastructure Community
  • Status (~2min) of each CFT/Community in Monday Meeting

[FScholPer]

2025-03-31

Participants

• @johannes-esr
• @qor-lb
• @markert-r
• @antonkri
• @FScholPer
• @guysagnes

Agenda

• Feedback for planning milestones

Meeting Minutes

• We need the participants for the architecture workshop A1 @qor-lb

[johannes-esr]

2025-04-02

Participants

@johannes-esr
@antonkri
@FScholPer

Agenda

• Review of Monday Meeting

Meeting Minutes

• Detailed check of tasks of Operational Community on Friday, 1:30 - 2:30pm

[TomFleischmann]

2025-04-07

Participants

@markert-r
@antonkri
@TomFleischmann
@qor-lb
@FScholPer
@guysagnes

Agenda

• Review last weeks cross functional community meeting
• Review roadmap for next meeting
• Craft agenda for next meeting
• Briefly discuss day & topic distribution for arch workshop

Meeting minutes

Review last weeks cross functional community meeting

• Some discussions touched on topics in parallel / double was observed
  -> could be improved to talk alongside the roadmap / epics board roadmap / epics board and teams then deep dive into their more detailed boards
• Invites are not easy to graps / have in every bodies calendar better, potential to improve meeting management for OSS projects (@TomFleischmann to ask EF what other projects successfully do)
• Potentially better: One sends out the invite per meeting and create a meeting overview page (When, Who, What, Link, ..)
• Maybe not good to the whole world in the project lead meeting - makes it hard to get topics done and not helpfull for new parties who want to contribute and join in

Review roadmap for next meeting

• Minor: some items have a wrong end date
• Discussed usage of templates including checks (req linking, ..) for repositories
• Pro: makes it easier for all subprojects to follow the same process (and adhere and enable later safety certification)
• Have a central solution and example for coding, unittest, req links, linting, compiler flags, ... makes sense to avoid "works in my subproject/works on my machine"
• Anton: Consensus of central bazel, yet CI config may need to differ (or define at a later point in time) in order to have 1st steps in the projects made easier and learn first
• A lot of bazel and CI work in repos currently -> Action: Extra discussion with Arch community to unblock @AlexanderLanin and to describe target picture

Craft agenda for next meeting

• Review roadmap and have everybody to give a status update and important dependencies
• Raise topic about central repository template to help prioritize (try-out defined process); needs an extra meeting with tooling community & tech leads & some of the feature teams ; @markert-r to make invite for an hour

Briefly discuss day & topic distribution for arch workshop from Tuesday to Thursday

• As we better know a 1.0 scope the question around what could be used/based on autosar is time wise good to have on Thursday.

[FScholPer]

2025-04-11

Participants

Agenda

• Currently there are many Stakeholder requirements which are outdated and the granularity differs much for example between com & feo.

Meeting minutes

[johannes-esr]

2025-04-11

Participants

@johannes-esr
@TomFleischmann
@FScholPer
@markert-r

Meeting Minutes

• Review Milestone Planning
  • Check with Alexander L. whether this intermediate milestones can be deleted
  • What to do with "Blueprint Definition" Milestone? To be checked in next TL circle

[johannes-esr]

2025-04-14

Participants

@johannes-esr
@TomFleischmann
@antonkri
@markert-r

Agenda

1. Review of TL Sync Meeting Slots
2. Meetings during easter holiday
3. What to do with "Blueprint Definition" Milestone
4. Outcome of Architecture Workshop
5. Agenda TL, CFT, Community Sync
6. General

Meeting Minutes

1. • Monday, 9 - 10 am
   • Wednesday, 9 - 10 am
   • Friday, 8:35 - 9 am
   • Friday, 1:30 - 2:30 pm
   • @qor-lb to delete invitations in Eclipse calender
   • @markert-r to invite for new meetings
2. • Meetings on 2025-04-18 & 2025-04-21 are cancelled
3. • Milestone renamed, https://github.com/eclipse-score/score/milestone/15
   • @FScholPer to break down into epics
4. • Epic: Define scope for S-CORE 1.0 #908
   • Epic: Architectural gap analysis S-CORE v0.5 #904
5. • Deletion of intermedia milestones
6. • Review of "Modules Buildable" on 2025-04-28

[nmohanan31]

2025-09-25 Sync TL & Process

Participants

@FScholPer
@qor-lb
@nmohanan31
@antonkri
Alexandru Kampmann
Christian Rappl
@hth9fe
TSI- C.A.Brayan

Agenda & Meeting Minutes

• Current understanding of voting of PL circle
  • There are Other Roles paragraph that gives some direction:
  • There is also Committer section in the documentation that gives some direction :
  • We would still propose to make the TL's role obsolete and all the TL's become PL's to be inline with the Eclipse roles
  • The 50% committer agreement rule needs to be explored
    • We define this when we describe team roles and how the 50% agreement rule will be reached
    • If a team brings feature code in, then the team can also bring a committer in and be part of the code owners group. The committer needs to be familiar or involved in writing the code in the first place.
    • Committer here is who reviews and approves the PRs
    • How do we see non-commercial contributors be part of the process above. We could simply not make the separation and all contributors have a chance to become the committer. -> Process to become a committer.
• Capgemini personnel are interested to contribute to S-core and will probably join the Office hours meeting next Monday.
• What is the ruleset/criteria of making a new repo in S-core. (There are quite a lot of repos now in Score which are not based on features)
  • The repo creation should be first discussed in a forum such as TL circle or architecture community or infra community
  • We would need an issue template for a repo creation
  • Every repo should be linked to a team
  • Would require a code owner for the repo
  • PLs and security team of eclipse are the two teams that can approve the creation PR of a repo
• Call for contribution for feature requests process needs to be done
  • One main aspect to it is that it needs to have a review period where the leads/teams can assess the contribution
• Agree on S-Core v0.5 "must have" process requirements #1782 , issue is in progress for automated and manual checks for the integration gate
  • We have an agreement with the process community that they will prioritize the manual checks that needs to be done for the I gate and will be used for showing in the audit
  • Call for contributions - should we have two dates one in November and one in January?
  • ABI compatibility, config management, health lifecycle in November
  • PLMS will be available in opensource for Health and Life cycle by Feb or March 2026 so will be seen as a contribution deadline then
  • Time is for January
  • Diag and fault management is for January
  • SOME/IP will be potentially for November which will be shown with v-SOME/IP and gateway. The SOME/IP stack will not be shown till there is a solution based on autosar licensing
  • BMW is planning a training for Bazel which will be shared with the community for others to attend

Action items:

• To discuss with the PL's about removing the TL roles and the TL's becoming the PL's
• To formulate a process to become a code owner for a repo/team: @antonkri
• Write the proposal of being a committer in the PR Feature team creation #1714 : @antonkri
• To write to review the process of creating repo for review: @FScholPer
• To write a proposal for the feature request/call for contribution: @qor-lb
• Approve the PR rework the section of work item types and relationship of the same #1605 which has the changes done by Johannes
• Clarify the plan with PLMS and life cycle in the architecture round: @qor-lb
• To check with Nico for Bazel training: @antonkri

[nmohanan31]

2025-09-29 Sync TL & Process

Participants

@qor-lb
@nmohanan31
@hth9fe
Christian Rappl
TSI- C.A.Brayan
@ubmarco
Daniel Steinke

Meeting Minutes

• We still need to review the PR from Thomas and Johannes -
• Feature request process in progress.
  • Pointers were taken from other big projects like Kubernetes and Rust foundation
• C.A.Brayan will present a work contribution in the next office hours.
• The score 1.0 architecture is on the website
• The meeting was closed early

Action Items

• To schedule a review meeting for the Planning process(Action item from the TL September workshop in Ulm) which includes the PR rework the section of work item types and relationship of the same #1605 from Thomas: @johannes-esr

[johannes-esr]

2025-10-03

Participants

• @johannes-esr
• @antonkri
• @hth9fe
• @nmohanan31
  Christian Rappl (Schaeffler)

Agenda & Meeting Minutes

• rework the section of work item types and relationship of the same #1605 -> remove updated picture, to be merged afterwards
  • @johannes-esr to include information about planning after merge of the PR
• Change of TL roles to PL, Proposal for PL round
• FEO FT (view)
  • Meeting needed with every FT & Community to plan the iterations
    • Infrastructure Community: Monday, 6th of October, 1 pm
    • Process Community: Monday, 6th of October, 3 pm
    • Testing Community: Tuesday, 7th of October, 11:30 am
    • Talk to FT in Monday Meeting
• Technical Lead Circle LOP (view)

[antonkri]

2025-10-03

Participants

• @antonkri
• @hth9fe
• @nmohanan31
• @qor-lb
• Paul Sherwood
• @FScholPer
• @opajonk
• @calbryan1

Agenda & Meeting Minutes

• @FScholPer schedule a separate meeting with @FScholPer to go through the table of process requirements and discuss the example repository.
• The discussion which contribution pitches should happen when are still in the discussion. It should be clarified by the end of this week.
  • @qor-lb to update the tickets and create a second product increment for contribution pitches in Jan.
• S-Core v0.5 "Full Implementation" milestone:
  • The implementation should be finished (Every FT says they are done with implementation for v0.5)
    • every feature should link their tickets to one of these milestones.
      • [C++] Components Feature Complete #1549
      • [Rust] Components Feature Complete #1552
  • I-Gate should be green and a release tag should exist for following components
    • baselibs, lola, persistency
    • following checks in the I-Gate: gcc & qcc compilation, unit-tests, building of documentation
    • @antonkri should create a sync with Frank, Alex, Nikola for current status of the integration gate.
  • A small demo application, e.g. logging over console, in QNX reference image.
  • A release of reference integration repo, that references the real releases of the modules.
• PMP
  • rework the section of work item types and relationship of the same #1605 is still open. @hth9fe will check the comment from @johannes-esr and will try to address it and to merge the PR.
  • @johannes-esr will update the description of planning and share the PR with TLs.

• Project Lead Circle

[johannes-esr]

2025-10-09

Participants

@johannes-esr
@hth9fe
@nmohanan31
@antonkri
Martin Le Bourgeois @mlebourgeois
Kai Hudalla

Agenda & Meeting Minutes

• Presentation by Martin: Capella (Open Source MBSE Solution)
  • https://mbse-capella.org/
  • https://github.com/eclipse-sdv-blueprints/companion-application
  • SysOn: https://mbse-syson.org/
• PL Circle: https://github.com/orgs/eclipse-score/discussions/1836
• Ticket Types in score:
  • Remove of Milestone
  • Renaming of Epic to Story
  • @johannes-esr to raise ticket in Eclipse Help Desk
• Labels in score:
  • Prepare PR which describes which labels to use and their strategy
  • Adapt our labels afterwards
• Agenda for Monday meeting at 10am: https://github.com/orgs/eclipse-score/discussions/434
• Release 0.5
• Incubation to final repository; Final Repositories should be based on module_template
• PR for Feature Team Creation merged

[johannes-esr]

2025-10-13

Participants

@johannes-esr
@qor-lb
@DanielSteinkeSDV
@odra
@antonkri
@nmohanan31
@calbryan1
@FScholPer
@hth9fe

Agenda & Meeting Minutes

• Change of Ticket Types -> Log In to Eclipse GitLab not working
• [Contribution Requests] Identify maintainer for the 1.0 (1st round - 4th - 6th Nov 2025) #1571 (comment)
  • Source code shall be available for the pitch
  • Try to build consensus within Committers of the Archictecture Community within four weeks after the pitch
    • If no consensus is found, a comparision has to be prepared and decision has to be taken by TLs/PLs via voting
  • for each feature, there will be one incubation repository; each pitch can be one branch/fork; based on module template
• On Thursday: Write down steps how to move from TLs to PLs
• Release: 15th of October

[johannes-esr]

2025-10-16

Participants

@johannes-esr
@antonkri
@thilo-schmitt
Mohammad Fouly
@nmohanan31

Agenda & Meeting Minutes

• Introduction Mohammad Fouly (seitech-solutions)
  • Idea: Integrate S-CORE on QNX image on a Raspberry Pi
• Release 0.5
  • We agreed on two milestone:
    • Release of 0.5 -> 15th of October
      • Make sure to call it "alpha"/"preview"/... -> "0.5.0-preview"
      • This release tag will be created within the reference_integration repository
      • reference_integration references S-CORE modules of different versions; The used versions in the 0.5.0-preview will be noted down in the release notes
      • Every module should create release notes on its own
      • Planned modules:
        • reference_integration -> main repository composing the distribution
          • Integration Gate which ensures modules are buildable and runnable together
          • Enough for preview release: One ITF tests shows the application runs, QNX image for x86 builds
        • baselibs (buildable with gcc & qcc, unit tests executed, coverage)
        • communication (buildable with gcc & qcc, unit tests executed, coverage)
        • C++ persistency (?)
        • docs_as_code (How many of the process requirements are covered by the tooling right now?)
        • process
        • score
        • toolchain
    • https://eclipse-score.github.io/score/main/platform_management_plan/release_management.html should be updated on current discussion
    • Release notes should be included on S-CORE website -> to be checked with CoBra M for X-Core
    • 0.5 Certifiable -> End of 2025

Topics for next meeting:

• Process for Feature Teams
• Future of Technical Leads
• Structuring of Discussions
• Rust API for Lola

[johannes-esr]

2025-10-20

Participants

@johannes-esr
@devcurmudgeon
@odra
@DanielSteinkeSDV
@antonkri
@FScholPer
@nmohanan31
Andreas Mittag (ETAS)

Agenda & Meeting Minutes

• Release 0.5
  • Inform in meeting at 10am about plan regarding release
  • Ask every Community/FT to do the release and write the release notes -> Release Notes shall be written in the message of the Git tag
  • https://eclipse-score.github.io/score/main/design_decisions/DR-002-infra.html
  • Align on usage of toolchains -> address in meeting at 10am
• Static & Dynamic Code Analysis / Feedback from internal pipelines to S-CORE
  • clang-tidy #728
  • Define compiler flags for gcc compiler #731
  • https://eclipse-score.github.io/score/main/contribute/development/cpp/coding_guidelines.html
  • @FScholPer to schedule follow-up meeting
• Structuring of Discussions -> Announcement in meeting at 10am, that every meeting series shall have ONE discussion thread. New meeting minutes shall be added as a new comment

Next meeting:

• Process for Feature Teams
• Future of Technical Leads
• Rust API for Lola

[antonkri]

2025-10-23

Participants

@anmittag
@antonkri
Pawel
@nmohanan31
@qor-lb
@christian Rappl
@hth9fe

Agenda & Meeting Minutes

• Release 0.5-alpha

  • move release date to 11.11.2025
  • Product increment for collecting tasks and bugs to achieve the s-core release v0.5-alpha Prepare s-core v0.5 alpha release #1925
  • score handbook

• project lead circle

  • Agenda
  • Document exact steps for starting elections to project leads for technical leads

• Process for Feature Teams

• How we create Feature teams

  • Anton has sent an email to Wayne with a proposal and have got comments

• Future of Technical Leads

• Rust API for Lola

  • A preliminary version of the final rust API of lola/communication is required for 0.5 release
  • We shall discuss this with Ulrich on Monday in the communication feature meeting, if not have a dedicated session with Ulrich(@LittleHuba)

Meeting minutes

• The Release 0.5-Alpha is meant to also test the process and understand what works and what breaks which would be lessons learned for the official 0.5 release date.
• The acceptance criteria for requirements and architecture is that they need to be in one place to a certain level of maturity but it does not need to be complete
• Proposal for release notes is that when we create a Release tag in GitHub we add the release notes to the comments
• There is a proposal from the process community to remove the TLs from the process description and instead have safety and quality managers to look at the work and review
  • We should probably have quality mangers to be code owners
• To check what level does the quality management take place?
• We should keep the safety and quality checks for the Alpha release to basic
• We should make it clear in the release documentation that this is an experimental release
• Meta Feature Request: Platform request #1691
  • Its about the process of how to get a new OS support in to S-Core
  • There is agreement that this process is required? - Yes, lets try it.
    • Next steps:
      • Lars to bring it into the Process community meeting to take this ahead
      • Start discussing on how this would look like for QNX - Tier 2 or 1?
• Is there a process to release a new module into S-Core via the reference integration I-gate?
  • Lars will clarify with Markus Bechter
• Can we create a separate repo for Rust baselibs?
  • Yes, this is possible but first to discuss with @4og to have alignment.

Action items

• Process for release version, notes to be created in the Product increment: @antonkri
• To write to Christian for cancelling the Project lead circle: @FScholPer
• Add agenda item for next Thursday to define the exact points for electing PLs and removing TLs: @nmohanan31
• Discuss process for creation of Feature teams on Monday TL meeting: @antonkri
• Give Ulrich heads up to for the Rust API topic discussion: @antonkri

[pawelrutkaq]

Rust baselib dicussions was documented here https://github.com/orgs/eclipse-score/discussions/1934

[nmohanan31]

2025-10-30

Participants

Agenda

• Describe the process of electing PLs

Meeting minutes

[nmohanan31]

2025-10-27

Participants

@antonkri
@chheis
@opajonk
@FScholPer
@qor-lb
@hth9fe
Andreas Mittag

Agenda

• Call for contribution workshop
• 0.5 Alpha release communication to the team
• Separate rust-base-libs repo
• How to get more committers for the repos
• Sync of internal company repo with S-core
• Static code analysis

Meeting minutes

Call for contribution workshop

• Please send company and name info to [email protected], if you want to be onsite attending the call for contribution workshop
  • Dead line would be mid of this week.
  • Deadline for the code contribution is 3rd of November 2025 ([Contribution Requests] Identify maintainer for the 1.0 (1st round - 4th - 6th Nov 2025) #1571)
  • Agenda for the workshop (Architecture Community F2F Workshop [2025-11-04 - 2025-11-06] #1922)

0.5 Alpha release communication to the team

• For the 0.5 Alpha release we are going to have teams (safety, security etc.) that would approve the feature release.
  • We need to discuss with the process community to align how we do the above along with @AlexanderLanin

Separate rust-base-libs repo

• The PR for the new repo for rust-base-libs is merged
  • The code ownerships of the repo needs to be with rust developers?
  • And the content of the base-libs?
  • We have different base-libs modules for eg. for OS that makes it messy so it would make sense to have these separate repos.
  • zuul is another tool like bazel to push complex repositories

How to get more committers for the repos

• If we can find consensus for selecting the appropriate implementation for features from the pitches, this should help keeping the maintainers for the repo
  • Once the decision is made for an implementation we will create a feature team and assign the developers from the pitches for that particular feature to the team. This is to make sure that they will continue to me be maintainers for the feature going forward.
    • This should be communicated clearly in the start of the call for contributions workshop

Sync of internal company repo with S-core

• Copybara template is in a PR Improve main documentation design #42 , to help sync a company internal repo with S-core and vice-versa. This is currently formulated for Github enterprise. If there is interest for others like Gitlab then please let the TLs know.

Static code analysis

• LDRA tool is under discussion in the SDV Technical Advisory Committee to be used as an Eclipse CI/CD pipeline for the projects that require it. This means that Eclipse foundation pays for the license and Score describes with what rules its configured for the project.(It does have MISRA rules as an example and can be configured for certification)
• There is another Eclipse project called Soteria that is also proposing the certification of a toolchain which needs to be also discussed as part of this conversation.

Action items:

• Decide on the maintainer(&committer) of the rust base-libs repo - TLs
• Discuss how we want to configure base-libs with the communities - TLs

[chheis]

Please correct the statement above: "LDRA tool is under discussion within the SDV TAC to be used within in the Eclipse CI/CD pipeline for the projects that require it."

[FScholPer]

@chheis done

[nmohanan31]

2025-10-30

Participants

@antonkri
@FScholPer
@sankurm
@nmohanan31

Agenda

• Static code analysis
• Orchestration
• C++ implementation of App framework

Meeting Minutes

• There was a technical advisory committee meeting where the topic of Static code analysis was discussed while the feedback to use LDRA as a commercial tool was collected. There are voices to be cautions to use commercial tools.

  • Background to is there would be people and money that would be necessary and so would require approvals
  • We need some code coverage to be present
  • Clangtidy will be integrated into Bazel in the coming days and the MISRA checks will be in by the end of the year (2025)
  • The 0.5 Certifiable milestone is when we aim to have static code analysis and other quality checks

• Orchestration would be also part of the 11th of November 2025 release

  • We need to check what the time line is for Soteria (Ferrocene) @nmohanan31

• Should we have a C++ implementation of App framework along with DAAL into S-Core?

  • The integration needs to be discussed in the architecture community meeting
  • This will also be discussed in the Call for contribution workshop next week

• There was a Cmake compilation in baselibs Improvement: otterdog extended configuration with branch protection #33 . Our opinion is that we should stick to Bazel and not support multiple build system.

[chheis]

@nmohanan31: This statement is wrong: "There was a technical advisory committee meeting around Static code analysis who advised not to use commercial tools"
Correct is: "There was a technical advisory committee meeting where the topic of Static code analysis was discussed while the feedback to use LDRA as a commercial tool was collected. There are voices to be cautions to use commercial tools." => there was NO advise from the TAC

[nmohanan31]

@chheis, Thanks for the clarification 🙏 I have updated the meeting minutes.

[antonkri]

2025-10-30

Participants

@antonkri
@odra
@chheis
@anmittag
@hth9fe
@DanielSteinkeSDV
@qor-lb
@opajonk
@FScholPer

Meeting Minutes

• Software architecture workshop
  • configd and mw:lifecycle from BMW will be published EOB
  • SOME/IP gateway code was open sourced by EB/Aumovio as well, link is in the ticket, https://github.com/Elektrobit/inc_gateway
  • we should repeat it today in the meeting with FTs and Communities.
• Release 11.11
  • Actions are commented in the product increment: Prepare s-core v0.5 alpha release #1925
  • Discuss with Nikola and Alexander Lanin whether we could put I-Gate release verification pipeline to CI/CD workflows.
  • Ask whether we can already run rust applications in qnx qemu env. If yes, would we be able to add it to reference integration repo?

[FScholPer]

2025-11-06

Participants

@antonkri
@FScholPer
@PiotrKorkus
B Ennouri
@hth9fe
@AlexanderLanin

Meeting Minutes

score_baselibs

• Release exists ✅ v0.1.3
• Release in bazel_registry ✅ (manual release, since baselibs does not release from main branch)
• Release notes ❌
• Feature requirements, Feature architecture described in score repository ❓
• Assumption of use defined in module repository❓
• Component requirements and architecture❓

score_communication

• Release exists ✅ v0.1.0
• Release in bazel_registry ✅ (manual release, since baselibs does not release from main branch)
• Release notes ❌
• Feature requirements, Feature architecture described in score repository ❓
• Assumption of use defined in module repository❓
• Component requirements and architecture❓

score_persistency

• Release exists ❌
• Release in bazel_registry ❌
• Release notes ❌
• Feature requirements, Feature architecture described in score repository ❓
• Assumption of use defined in module repository❓
• Component requirements and architecture❓

score_orchestrator

• Release exists ✅ v0.0.3
• Release in bazel_registry ✅
• Release notes ❌ -> @PiotrKorkus will provide high level release notes to @antonkri
• Feature requirements, Feature architecture described in score repository ✅
• Assumption of use defined in module repository ❌
• Component requirements and architecture ❌

score_scrample

• Release exists ✅ v0.1.0
• Release in bazel_registry ✅
• Release notes ✅
• Note: no CODEOWNERS defined at the moment

score_test_scenarios

• Release exists ✅ v0.3.0
• Release in bazel_registry ✅
• Release notes ✅

score_itf

• Release exists ✅ v0.1.0
• Release in bazel_registry ✅
• Release notes ✅ (except does not follow template)

score_itf

• Release exists ✅ v0.1.0
• Release in bazel_registry ✅
• Release notes ✅ (except does not follow template)

score_docs_as_code

• Release exists ✅
• Release in bazel_registry ✅
• Release notes ❌

score_toolchains_...

• Release exists ✅
• Release in bazel_registry ✅
• Release notes ❌

score_process_description

• Release exists ✅
• Release in bazel_registry ✅
• Release notes ❓

score (platform)

• Release exists ❌
• Release in bazel_registry ❌
• Release notes ❌

reference_integration (last one)

• Release exists ❌
• Release in bazel_registry ❌
• Release notes ❌

Tasks for 0.5.0-alpha⚠️

• reference_integration has local patches for some repositories. That list is not yet properly reported to the modules.

Future tasks/remarks

• python version is currently not unified
• TRLC does not have a release
• Let's have "maintainers" in bazel_registry reflect the CODEOWNERS in the modules. People who are responsible for a release. Must probably be committers. To be synced with process-community.
• some inconsistency between having a "v" prefix or not in github releases/tags

[PiotrKorkus]

score_orchestrator -> Assumption of use defined in module repository ❌
there are multiple examples in the repository:
https://github.com/eclipse-score/orchestrator/tree/main/src/kyron#%EF%B8%8F-example
https://github.com/eclipse-score/orchestrator/tree/main/src/orchestration/examples
https://github.com/eclipse-score/orchestrator/tree/main/src/kyron/examples

[4og]

I added release notes for baselibs: https://github.com/eclipse-score/baselibs/releases/tag/v0.1.3

[masc2023]

Process_Description Release v1.3.0 available for S-CORE-PLATFORM v0.5, https://github.com/eclipse-score/process_description/releases

[FScholPer]

2025-11-10

Participants

Agenda

• Release 0.5 notes for orchesrator and test scenarios #1975
• WIP: first version of score book #1932

Meeting Minutes