search

strictdoc-project / strictdoc

Software for technical documentation and requirements management.
https://strictdoc.readthedocs.io/en/stable/
Other
151 stars 24 forks source link

views: Support custom views for passthrough #1910

Closed haxtibal closed 2 months ago

haxtibal commented 2 months ago

This enhances #1509. It makes the custom views option available for the passthrough command. Command line syntax is the same as for export:

strictdoc passthrough --view MY_VIEW .

We can now do an sdoc -> sdoc transformation where only fields from a given custom view are retained in the output sdoc.

haxtibal commented 2 months ago

WIP because I have to check for completeness yet. You can comment right now if you see problems with the approach.

The few interesting design decisions:

stanislaw commented 2 months ago

WIP because I have to check for completeness yet. You can comment right now if you see problems with the approach.

The approach is good. The price of introducing project_config to the SDWriter feels a little to high but doing without, by only passing a view= parameter that would have to be added to all the writer's functions, is not better.

The only further work we should do is to move the filter-requirements/sections and view to the export command where the whole export would benefit from these options. The passthrough command would only stay with the --free-text-to-text which is an exception for migrating for FREETEXT to TEXT.

The few interesting design decisions:

* Command line takes one `--view`, not many `--views`, for consistency with the export command.

This is fine but I think we should not keep it with passthrough unless you have good arguments for keeping it.

* Filtering happens in `SDWriter`, as opposed to `TraceabilityIndexBuilder` as --filter-requirements does. That's because a view shall only affect the output, not the inner model.

This makes sense.

* We need to propagate project config. `SDWriter` gets it per constructor injection. It's a boring change but causes the bulk of the diff.

It is ok. Happens all the time with similar changes.

I am merging this change as-is but let's discuss if we want to clean up the passthrough from --filter-requirements, --filter-sections and --view and have them working in export.

haxtibal commented 2 months ago

I am merging this change as-is

Ok, thanks!

but let's discuss if we want to clean up the passthrough from --filter-requirements, --filter-sections and --view and have them working in export.

Your reasoning on Discord for it was good. From what I've seen it'll be another mostly boring change with bigger diff. Would be good to have it prior to Q3. I'll try to help.

stanislaw commented 2 months ago

I am merging this change as-is

Ok, thanks!

but let's discuss if we want to clean up the passthrough from --filter-requirements, --filter-sections and --view and have them working in export.

Your reasoning on Discord for it was good. From what I've seen it'll be another mostly boring change with bigger diff. Would be good to have it prior to Q3. I'll try to help.

Thanks! Many of the open tickets are mostly boring changes :) Here's a ticket to track this: https://github.com/strictdoc-project/strictdoc/issues/1913.