issue_2501_created_missing_drafts

docs/index.rst

@@ -89,7 +89,7 @@ Project structure and processes
    .. grid-item-card::
 
       Platform Management Plan (PMP)
-      ^^^
+      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
       Read about our project and organization structure in the
       :ref:`Project Handbook <pmp>`.
       And learn how we deal with :ref:`Platform Safety Plan <score_platform_safety_plan>` or care about :ref:`Software Verification Plan <software_verification_plan>`.
@@ -105,10 +105,12 @@ Project structure and processes
       requirements/index
       modules/index
       contribute/index
+      release/index
 
       Releases <score_releases/index.rst>
       Tools <score_tools/index.rst>
       PMP <platform_management_plan/index.rst>
+      safety/index
       Eclipse <https://projects.eclipse.org/projects/automotive.score>
       design_decisions/index
 

docs/platform_management_plan/index.rst

@@ -50,3 +50,4 @@ Platform Management Plan
    role_assignment/platform_safety_manager
    role_assignment/platform_security_manager
    role_assignment/platform_quality_manager
+

docs/platform_management_plan/safety_management.rst

@@ -377,8 +377,8 @@ Functional Safety/Security Management SW Platform Work Products
 
     * - :need:`wp__verification_platform_ver_report`
       - :ndf:`copy('status', need_id='wf__verification_platform_ver_report')`
-      - <Link to WP>
-      - <automated>
+      - :need:`doc__platform_verification_report`
+      - draft
 
     * - :need:`wp__requirements_stkh`
       - :ndf:`copy('status', need_id='wf__req_stkh_req')`
@@ -429,18 +429,18 @@ Functional Safety Specific SW Platform Work Products
 
     * - :need:`wp__fdr_reports` (platform Safety Plan)
       - :ndf:`copy('status', need_id='wf__p_formal_rv')`
-      - <Link to WP>
-      - <automated>
+      - :need:`doc__platform_safety_plan_fdr`
+      - draft
 
     * - :need:`wp__fdr_reports` (platform Safety Package)
       - :ndf:`copy('status', need_id='wf__p_formal_rv')`
-      - <Link to WP>
-      - <automated>
+      - :need:`doc__platform_safety_package_fdr`
+      - draft
 
     * - :need:`wp__fdr_reports` (feature's Safety Analyses & DFA)
       - :ndf:`copy('status', need_id='wf__p_formal_rv')`
-      - <Link to WP>
-      - <automated>
+      - :need:`doc__platform_safety_analysis_fdr`
+      - draft
 
     * - :need:`wp__audit_report`
       - performed by external experts
@@ -449,13 +449,13 @@ Functional Safety Specific SW Platform Work Products
 
     * - :need:`wp__platform_dfa`
       - :ndf:`copy('status', need_id='wf__analyse_platform_featarch')`
-      - <Link to WP>
-      - <automated>
+      - :need:`doc__platform_dfa`
+      - draft
 
     * - :need:`wp__platform_safety_manual`
       - :ndf:`copy('status', need_id='wf__cr_mt_safety_manual')`
-      - <Link to WP>
-      - <automated>
+      - :need:`doc__platform_safety_manual`
+      - draft
 
     * - :need:`wp__safety_tailoring` (generic)
       - :ndf:`copy('status', need_id='wf__def_app_process_description')`

docs/release/index.rst

@@ -0,0 +1,25 @@
+..
+   # *******************************************************************************
+   # Copyright (c) 2026 Contributors to the Eclipse Foundation
+   #
+   # See the NOTICE file(s) distributed with this work for additional
+   # information regarding copyright ownership.
+   #
+   # This program and the accompanying materials are made available under the
+   # terms of the Apache License Version 2.0 which is available at
+   # https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
+   #
+   # SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0
+   # *******************************************************************************
+
+..
+
+Release documentation
+=====================
+
+Release specific documentation for Platform is listed here
+
+.. toctree::
+   :maxdepth: 1
+
+   platform_ver_report.rst

docs/release/platform_ver_report.rst

@@ -0,0 +1,59 @@
+..
+   # *******************************************************************************
+   # Copyright (c) 2026 Contributors to the Eclipse Foundation
+   #
+   # See the NOTICE file(s) distributed with this work for additional
+   # information regarding copyright ownership.
+   #
+   # This program and the accompanying materials are made available under the
+   # terms of the Apache License Version 2.0 which is available at
+   # https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
+   #
+   # SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0
+   # *******************************************************************************
+
+Platform Verification Report
+============================
+
+.. document:: Platform Verification Report
+   :id: doc__platform_verification_report
+   :status: draft
+   :safety: ASIL_B
+   :security: NO
+   :realizes: wp__verification_platform_ver_report
+   :tags:
+
+
+
+**<In its final form (status = valid), Platform Verification Report must contain:>**
+
+   **1. Verification Coverage**
+
+   **1.1. on Requirements**
+     - Lists of stakeholder and feature requirements tested by which test case, passed/failed/not_run and completeness verdict
+       (this shall be generated by tools and accompanied by progress charts to be usable also for project steering)
+     - For external component Assumptions of Use: coverage by platform safety manual
+     - This is split in a list of QM requirements tested and a separate list of tests for ASIL rated requirements.
+     - List of stakeholder requirements (ASIL rated) linked to inspection checklist and verdict (derived from PR export)
+
+    **1.2. on Architecture**
+     - List of feature architecture tags tested by which test case, passed/failed and completeness verdict
+       (this shall be generated by tools and accompanied by progress charts to be usable also for project steering)
+     - This is split in a list of QM features tested and a separate list of tests for ASIL rated features.
+     - List of feature architecture tags (ASIL rated) linked to inspection checklist and verdict (derived from PR export)
+
+     - The lists may also contain other verification methods
+
+    **2. Safety Analyses Report**
+     - List of the performed Platform and Feature Safety Analyses, pass/fail with open mitigations
+
+    **3. Test results**
+     - Test result per test case with status passed/failed/not_run for :need:`wp__verification_platform_int_test` and :need:`wp__verification_feat_int_test`
+
+    **4. Test logs**
+     - Test log per test case with status passed/failed/not_run for :need:`wp__verification_platform_int_test` and :need:`wp__verification_feat_int_test`
+       with status passed/failed/not_run
+
+    **Note1: The verification report is valid for the platform version tagged together with the report**
+
+    **Note2: All the above lists are generated automatically**

docs/safety/fdr_reports_safety_analyses_DFA.rst

@@ -0,0 +1,91 @@
+..
+   # *******************************************************************************
+   # Copyright (c) 2026 Contributors to the Eclipse Foundation
+   #
+   # See the NOTICE file(s) distributed with this work for additional
+   # information regarding copyright ownership.
+   #
+   # This program and the accompanying materials are made available under the
+   # terms of the Apache License Version 2.0 which is available at
+   # https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
+   #
+   # SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0
+   # *******************************************************************************
+
+
+Safety Analysis Formal Review Report
+====================================
+
+.. document:: Safety Analysis Formal Review Report
+   :id: doc__platform_safety_analysis_fdr
+   :status: draft
+   :safety: ASIL_B
+   :security: YES
+   :realizes: wp__fdr_reports
+   :tags:
+
+
+**Purpose**
+The purpose of this Safety Analysis (DFA and FMEA) checklist template is to collect the topics to be checked during verification of the Platform Safety Analysis & DFA.
+
+**Conduct**
+As described in :need:`wf__p_formal_rv`, the formal document review is performed by an "external" safety manager:
+
+- reviewer: <committer with safety manager skills explicitly named here>
+
+**Checklist**
+
+Please note that it is mandatory to fill in the "passed" column with "yes" or "no" for each checklist item and additional to add in the remarks why it is passed or not passed. In case of "no" an issue link to the issue tracking system has to be added in the last column. See also :need:`doc_concept__wp_inspections` for further information about reviews in general and inspection in particular.
+
+.. list-table:: Safety Analysis Checklist
+      :header-rows: 1
+      :widths: 10,30,30,15,8,8
+
+      * - Review ID
+        - Acceptance Criteria
+        - Guidance
+        - Passed
+        - Remarks
+        - Issue link
+      * - REQ_01_01
+        - Is / are the attribute sufficient set correctly?
+        - The mitigations shall have a direct influence ont the violation by prevention, detection or mitigation to reduce the risk to an acceptable level.
+        - The mitigations are sufficient.
+        - <yes|no>
+        -
+      * - REQ_01_02
+        - Are the templates for DFA and/or FMEA used?
+        - See :need:`doc__platform_dfa`
+        - Templates are used to generate the DFA or / and FMEA.
+        - <yes|no>
+        -
+      * - REQ_01_03
+        - Were the failure initiators / fault models applied?
+        - See :need:`gd_guidl__dfa_failure_initiators` / :need:`gd_guidl__fault_models`
+        - The applicable items of the failure initiators / fault models are used to ensure a structured analysis. For all not applicable items an argument shall be given in the content of the document.
+        - <yes|no>
+        -
+      * - REQ_01_04
+        - Are the failure effects clearly and completely described?
+        - Use the generic failure effect descriptions and enlarge the description if it's applicable to the considered element.
+        - The effects of the failure is described completely. The effect can be recognized easily.
+        - <yes|no>
+        -
+      * - REQ_01_06
+        - Is the attribute "mitigated by" linked correct?
+        - Check if the correct failure effect is linked via "mitigated by".
+        - The "mitigated by" link is correct.
+        - <yes|no>
+        -
+      * - REQ_01_07
+        - Is the sufficiency of the "mitigated by" (prevention, detection or mitigation) described or can it be recognized easily?
+        - The sufficiency of the "mitigated by" is described in the content of the document. It can be recognized easily.
+        - The "mitigated by" shows clearly that a fault / failure can be mitigated by the linked requirement by prevention, detection or mitigation. It shall be described in the contend.
+        - <yes|no>
+        -
+      * - REQ_01_08
+        - Is the overall result of the Safety Analysis described in the report?
+        - It shall be shown in the report if the Safety Analysis are finished and if all artifacts are "valid" and "sufficient".
+        - The results of the Safety Analysis are described in the report. The report is available :need:`wp__verification_platform_ver_report`.
+        - <yes|no>
+        -

docs/safety/fdr_reports_safety_package.rst

@@ -0,0 +1,73 @@
+..
+   # *******************************************************************************
+   # Copyright (c) 2026 Contributors to the Eclipse Foundation
+   #
+   # See the NOTICE file(s) distributed with this work for additional
+   # information regarding copyright ownership.
+   #
+   # This program and the accompanying materials are made available under the
+   # terms of the Apache License Version 2.0 which is available at
+   # https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
+   #
+   # SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0
+   # *******************************************************************************
+
+
+Safety Package Formal Review Report
+===================================
+
+.. document:: Platform Safety Package Formal Review
+   :id: doc__platform_safety_package_fdr
+   :status: draft
+   :safety: ASIL_B
+   :security: NO
+   :realizes: wp__fdr_reports
+   :tags: draft
+
+
+
+**Purpose**
+
+The purpose of this review checklist is to report status of the formal review for the Platform safety package.
+
+**Conduct**
+As described in :need:`wf__p_formal_rv`, the formal document review is performed by an "external" safety manager:
+
+- reviewer: <committer with safety manager skills explicitly named here>
+
+**Checklist**
+
+See also :need:`doc_concept__wp_inspections` for further information about reviews in general and inspection in particular.
+
+.. list-table:: Safety Package Checklist
+        :header-rows: 1
+
+        * - Id
+          - Safety package activity
+          - Compliant to ISO 26262?
+          - Comment
+
+        * - 1
+          - Is a safety package provided which matches the safety plan (i.e. all planned work products referenced)?
+          - [YES | NO ]
+          - <Rationale for result>
+
+        * - 2
+          - Is the argument how functional safety is achieved, provided in the safety package, plausible and sufficient?
+          - NO
+          - The argument is intentionally not provided by the project.
+
+        * - 3
+          - Are the referenced work products available?
+          - [YES | NO ]
+          - <Rationale for result>
+
+        * - 4
+          - Are the referenced work products in released state, including the process safety audit?
+          - [YES | NO ]
+          - <Rationale for result>
+
+        * - 5
+          - If safety related deviations from the process or safety concept are documented, are these argued understandably?
+          - [YES | NO ]
+          - <Rationale for result>