TirSystem/github-action
0
1
Fork 0
Code Issues 5 Pull Requests 1 Actions Packages Projects Releases 3 Wiki Activity

Merge pull request 'Write and accept the brief use cases for the P1 candidates (UCD-001, US-001, UC-001 to UC-004)' (#65) from mil-002-use-cases into main
Validate workflows / validate (push) Successful in 14s
Details
TirSystem/github-action: Sync GitHub mirror metadata / sync-metadata (push) Successful in 3s
Details

Browse Source 
Reviewed-on: #65
This commit was merged in pull request #65.
This commit is contained in:
Tirsvad
2026-10-10 07:07:15 +02:00
parent e73975e3a6 dc572470e7
commit 5608630d3d
16 changed files with 810 additions and 13 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files
docs/artifact-registry.md
+4 -1
View File
@@ -11,9 +11,12 @@ each document lives in *this* project and the next version to use.
| SA | Stakeholder Analysis | docs/stakeholder-analysis.md | 002 |
| PP | Project Plan | docs/project-plan.md | 002 |
| MIL | Milestone / Gateway | docs/milestones/*.md | 007 |
| RC | SQA Review Record | docs/sqa/reviews/rc-*.md | 019 |
| RC | SQA Review Record | docs/sqa/reviews/rc-*.md | 026 |
| TM | Traceability Matrix | docs/sqa/traceability-matrix.md | 002 |
| ADR | Architecture Decision Record | docs/adr/adr-NNNN-*.md | 0005 |
| UCD | Use Case Diagram | docs/use-case-diagram.md | 002 |
| US | User Story | docs/user-stories.md | 002 |
| UC | Use Case | docs/uc-NNN/uc.md | 005 |
## Languages
docs/project-plan.md
+6 -5
View File
@@ -4,13 +4,13 @@
| Key | Value |
| --- | --- |
| ID | PP-001 |
| CrossReference | [BC-001], [SA-001], [MIL-001], [MIL-002], [MIL-003], [MIL-004], [MIL-005], [MIL-006] |
| CrossReference | [BC-001], [SA-001], [US-001], [MIL-001], [MIL-002], [MIL-003], [MIL-004], [MIL-005], [MIL-006] |
## Version History
| Date | Status | Author | Reviewer | Change | Commit |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 2026-10-10 | Deprecated | Jens Tirsvad Nielsen | S01 | Reviewed (RC-015): JSON removed from the credential failures, answered MIL-001 decisions removed from Open Issues | [b282e10] |
| 2026-10-10 | Accepted | Jens Tirsvad Nielsen | S01 | Added gateway MIL-006 (shared wiki publishing) | [6b8e36d] |
| 2026-10-10 | Deprecated | Jens Tirsvad Nielsen | S01 | Added gateway MIL-006 (shared wiki publishing) | [6b8e36d] |
| 2026-10-10 | Accepted | Jens Tirsvad Nielsen | S01 | P1 use cases written and accepted (UCD-001, US-001, UC-001 to UC-004): Open Issues updated | [a2bf2d4] |
---
@@ -86,7 +86,7 @@ A No-Go moves every later window by the rework time of the failed milestone.
- Confirm the proposed dates and the start week (S01 and S05).
- No QC checklist exists for the Project Plan.
- Formal use cases need a use case diagram and user stories first; neither exists yet.
- The P1 candidates are written as brief use cases (UC-001 to UC-004) with a use case diagram (UCD-001) and user stories (US-001). The P2 and P3 candidates have no use case document yet.
## Appendix: Use Case Candidates and Prioritisation
@@ -244,6 +244,7 @@ no tests, no release process.
[BC-001]: ./business-case.md
[SA-001]: ./stakeholder-analysis.md
[US-001]: ./user-stories.md
[MIL-001]: ./milestones/mil-001-stabilise-metadata-sync.md
[MIL-002]: ./milestones/mil-002-onboarding-and-operations.md
[MIL-003]: ./milestones/mil-003-quality-checks.md
@@ -256,5 +257,5 @@ no tests, no release process.
[Milestone MIL-004]: https://git.tirsystem.com/TirSystem/github-action/milestone/21
[Milestone MIL-005]: https://git.tirsystem.com/TirSystem/github-action/milestone/93
[Milestone MIL-006]: https://git.tirsystem.com/TirSystem/github-action/milestone/94
[b282e10]: https://git.tirsystem.com/TirSystem/github-action/commit/b282e107416a890d6df27e6bdf23ab8a65e17123
[6b8e36d]: https://git.tirsystem.com/TirSystem/github-action/commit/6b8e36d67ac9af165b180bc0045289e41cfd1fc3
[a2bf2d4]: https://git.tirsystem.com/TirSystem/github-action/commit/a2bf2d420416f7aff2badc6fe32a7690e2e523fd
docs/sqa/reviews/rc-019-ucd-001.md
+48
View File
@@ -0,0 +1,48 @@
# Review Record: UCD-001
## Metadata
| Key | Value |
| --- | --- |
| ID | RC-019 |
| CrossReference | [UCD-001], [QC-UCD-001] |
## Version History
| Date | Status | Author | Reviewer | Change | Commit |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 2026-10-10 | Accepted | Jens Tirsvad Nielsen | S01 | Initial version | [a2bf2d4] |
---
## Artifact Under Review
- Instance reviewed: [UCD-001]
- Checklist used: [QC-UCD-001]
## Checklist Results
| # | Criterion | Status | Evidence/Notes |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 1 | Actors are defined with correct UML stereotypes (e.g. `<<System>>`, `<<Actor>>`) | Pass | DevOps Professional and Platform Operator are `<<Actor>>`; Gitea Instance and GitHub are `<<System>>`. |
| 2 | System boundary is clearly drawn and labeled | Pass | Boundary "Reusable Workflow Collection". |
| 3 | Include/extend relationships are used correctly per UML 2.5.1, not as generic "uses" arrows | Pass | One include and one extend, each with a justification in the Relationships table; the extend applies only on failure. |
| 4 | Every actor participates in at least one use case (no orphan actors) | Pass | All four actors appear in the Actor Table with goals. |
| 5 | Diagram is traceable to a documented stakeholder need | Pass | S05, S03 and S04 in the Actor Table; SA-001 and BC-001 cited. |
| 6 | Use case names are verb phrases describing actor goals, not internal system operations | Pass | Four goal names, none a system operation. |
| 7 | Diagram is free of implementation detail (e.g. UI widgets, database tables) | Pass | No tool, file or UI detail. |
| 8 | Actor and use case naming is consistent with corresponding Use Case and User Story documents | Pass | Checked mechanically: all four titles and both story roles match. |
## Overall Verdict
Go - all eight criteria pass. S01 gave the Go in chat on 2026-10-10, standing in for the other reviewers as ADR-0002 records; there is no independent reader.
## Action Items
| Action | Owner | Due |
| --- | --- | --- |
| None | - | - |
---
[UCD-001]: ../../use-case-diagram.md
[QC-UCD-001]: ../../../framework/qc/qc-use-case-diagram.md
[a2bf2d4]: https://git.tirsystem.com/TirSystem/github-action/commit/a2bf2d420416f7aff2badc6fe32a7690e2e523fd
docs/sqa/reviews/rc-020-us-001.md
+47
View File
@@ -0,0 +1,47 @@
# Review Record: US-001
## Metadata
| Key | Value |
| --- | --- |
| ID | RC-020 |
| CrossReference | [US-001], [QC-US-001] |
## Version History
| Date | Status | Author | Reviewer | Change | Commit |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 2026-10-10 | Accepted | Jens Tirsvad Nielsen | S01 | Initial version | [a2bf2d4] |
---
## Artifact Under Review
- Instance reviewed: [US-001]
- Checklist used: [QC-US-001]
## Checklist Results
| # | Criterion | Status | Evidence/Notes |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 1 | Follows INVEST criteria (Independent, Negotiable, Valuable, Estimable, Small, Testable) | Pass | INVEST check present; US-001.05 and US-001.06 depend on US-001.04 and say so. |
| 2 | Written in "As a / I want / So that" form | Pass | All eight. |
| 3 | Clear, testable acceptance criteria are included | Pass | Two Given/When/Then criteria per story, each checked by a run or the guide. |
| 4 | Traceable to a use case or epic | Pass | Each story traces to one of UC-001 to UC-004 and to MIL-002. |
| 5 | Story is sized to fit within a single iteration | Pass | Each is one goal; two are already implemented and only tested. |
| 6 | Story statement avoids technical implementation detail | Pass | Domain terms only (mirror, token, runner). |
| 7 | Role named in the story matches an actor defined in the Use Case Diagram | Pass | DevOps Professional and Platform Operator both appear in UCD-001. |
## Overall Verdict
Go - all seven criteria pass. S01 gave the Go in chat on 2026-10-10, standing in for the other reviewers as ADR-0002 records; there is no independent reader.
## Action Items
| Action | Owner | Due |
| --- | --- | --- |
| None | - | - |
---
[US-001]: ../../user-stories.md
[QC-US-001]: ../../../framework/qc/qc-user-story.md
[a2bf2d4]: https://git.tirsystem.com/TirSystem/github-action/commit/a2bf2d420416f7aff2badc6fe32a7690e2e523fd
docs/sqa/reviews/rc-021-uc-001.md
+52
View File
@@ -0,0 +1,52 @@
# Review Record: UC-001
## Metadata
| Key | Value |
| --- | --- |
| ID | RC-021 |
| CrossReference | [UC-001], [QC-UC-001] |
## Version History
| Date | Status | Author | Reviewer | Change | Commit |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 2026-10-10 | Accepted | Jens Tirsvad Nielsen | S01 | Initial version | [a2bf2d4] |
---
## Artifact Under Review
- Instance reviewed: [UC-001]
- Checklist used: [QC-UC-001] (Brief format)
## Checklist Results
| # | Criterion | Status | Evidence/Notes |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 1 | Consists of a single, concise paragraph summarizing only the primary success scenario | Pass | Finding fixed during this review: the paragraph also described the no-mirror alternative; it now summarizes only the main success scenario (the alternative is US-001.02). |
| 2 | Written as an informal multi-paragraph narrative; may mention some alternate flows without formal structure | N-A | Format is Brief. |
| 3 | All standard sections are present: actors, preconditions, postconditions, main success scenario, alternative/exception flows | N-A | Format is Brief; the sections of a Brief use case are present (actor, stakeholders, pre- and postconditions, paragraph). |
| 4 | Preconditions and postconditions are explicitly defined | Pass | Both stated. |
| 5 | Primary actor is explicitly stated | Pass | DevOps Professional. |
| 6 | Stakeholders and their interests are stated | Pass | S-IDs from SA-001 with an interest each. |
| 7 | Main success scenario is written as clear, numbered steps | N-A | Format is Brief: one paragraph. |
| 8 | Alternative/exception flows correctly reference `<<include>>`/`<<extend>>` use cases where relevant, per UML 2.5.1 | N-A | No alternative flows in a Brief use case; the relationships are in UCD-001. |
| 9 | Explicit business rules are captured per step where applicable, rather than embedded loosely in narrative text | N-A | No steps in a Brief use case. |
| 10 | Naming of actors and use case title is consistent with the corresponding Use Case Diagram and User Stories | Pass | Title and actor match UCD-001 and US-001 exactly. |
| 11 | Scope/level (e.g. summary, user-goal, subfunction) is explicitly stated | Pass | Scope and user-goal level stated. |
| 12 | Use case is written from the actor's goal perspective, free of UI or implementation detail | Pass | Goal wording; the guides and secrets are named, no UI. |
## Overall Verdict
Go - all applicable criteria pass; the one finding (criterion 1) was fixed during the review. S01 gave the Go in chat on 2026-10-10, standing in for the other reviewers as ADR-0002 records; there is no independent reader.
## Action Items
| Action | Owner | Due |
| --- | --- | --- |
| None | - | - |
---
[UC-001]: ../../uc-001/uc.md
[QC-UC-001]: ../../../framework/qc/qc-use-case.md
[a2bf2d4]: https://git.tirsystem.com/TirSystem/github-action/commit/a2bf2d420416f7aff2badc6fe32a7690e2e523fd
docs/sqa/reviews/rc-022-uc-002.md
+52
View File
@@ -0,0 +1,52 @@
# Review Record: UC-002
## Metadata
| Key | Value |
| --- | --- |
| ID | RC-022 |
| CrossReference | [UC-002], [QC-UC-001] |
## Version History
| Date | Status | Author | Reviewer | Change | Commit |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 2026-10-10 | Accepted | Jens Tirsvad Nielsen | S01 | Initial version | [a2bf2d4] |
---
## Artifact Under Review
- Instance reviewed: [UC-002]
- Checklist used: [QC-UC-001] (Brief format)
## Checklist Results
| # | Criterion | Status | Evidence/Notes |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 1 | Consists of a single, concise paragraph summarizing only the primary success scenario | Pass | Finding fixed during this review: the paragraph also described the failure alternatives; it now summarizes only the main success scenario (the alternatives are in US-001.03). |
| 2 | Written as an informal multi-paragraph narrative; may mention some alternate flows without formal structure | N-A | Format is Brief. |
| 3 | All standard sections are present: actors, preconditions, postconditions, main success scenario, alternative/exception flows | N-A | Format is Brief; the sections of a Brief use case are present (actor, stakeholders, pre- and postconditions, paragraph). |
| 4 | Preconditions and postconditions are explicitly defined | Pass | Both stated. |
| 5 | Primary actor is explicitly stated | Pass | DevOps Professional. |
| 6 | Stakeholders and their interests are stated | Pass | S-IDs from SA-001 with an interest each. |
| 7 | Main success scenario is written as clear, numbered steps | N-A | Format is Brief: one paragraph. |
| 8 | Alternative/exception flows correctly reference `<<include>>`/`<<extend>>` use cases where relevant, per UML 2.5.1 | N-A | No alternative flows in a Brief use case; the relationships are in UCD-001. |
| 9 | Explicit business rules are captured per step where applicable, rather than embedded loosely in narrative text | N-A | No steps in a Brief use case. |
| 10 | Naming of actors and use case title is consistent with the corresponding Use Case Diagram and User Stories | Pass | Title and actor match UCD-001 and US-001 exactly. |
| 11 | Scope/level (e.g. summary, user-goal, subfunction) is explicitly stated | Pass | Scope and user-goal level stated. |
| 12 | Use case is written from the actor's goal perspective, free of UI or implementation detail | Pass | Goal wording; the guides and secrets are named, no UI. |
## Overall Verdict
Go - all applicable criteria pass; the one finding (criterion 1) was fixed during the review. S01 gave the Go in chat on 2026-10-10, standing in for the other reviewers as ADR-0002 records; there is no independent reader.
## Action Items
| Action | Owner | Due |
| --- | --- | --- |
| None | - | - |
---
[UC-002]: ../../uc-002/uc.md
[QC-UC-001]: ../../../framework/qc/qc-use-case.md
[a2bf2d4]: https://git.tirsystem.com/TirSystem/github-action/commit/a2bf2d420416f7aff2badc6fe32a7690e2e523fd
docs/sqa/reviews/rc-023-uc-003.md
+52
View File
@@ -0,0 +1,52 @@
# Review Record: UC-003
## Metadata
| Key | Value |
| --- | --- |
| ID | RC-023 |
| CrossReference | [UC-003], [QC-UC-001] |
## Version History
| Date | Status | Author | Reviewer | Change | Commit |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 2026-10-10 | Accepted | Jens Tirsvad Nielsen | S01 | Initial version | [a2bf2d4] |
---
## Artifact Under Review
- Instance reviewed: [UC-003]
- Checklist used: [QC-UC-001] (Brief format)
## Checklist Results
| # | Criterion | Status | Evidence/Notes |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 1 | Consists of a single, concise paragraph summarizing only the primary success scenario | Pass | Finding fixed during this review: the paragraph also described the defect alternative; it now summarizes only the main success scenario (see US-001.06). |
| 2 | Written as an informal multi-paragraph narrative; may mention some alternate flows without formal structure | N-A | Format is Brief. |
| 3 | All standard sections are present: actors, preconditions, postconditions, main success scenario, alternative/exception flows | N-A | Format is Brief; the sections of a Brief use case are present (actor, stakeholders, pre- and postconditions, paragraph). |
| 4 | Preconditions and postconditions are explicitly defined | Pass | Both stated. |
| 5 | Primary actor is explicitly stated | Pass | DevOps Professional. |
| 6 | Stakeholders and their interests are stated | Pass | S-IDs from SA-001 with an interest each. |
| 7 | Main success scenario is written as clear, numbered steps | N-A | Format is Brief: one paragraph. |
| 8 | Alternative/exception flows correctly reference `<<include>>`/`<<extend>>` use cases where relevant, per UML 2.5.1 | N-A | No alternative flows in a Brief use case; the relationships are in UCD-001. |
| 9 | Explicit business rules are captured per step where applicable, rather than embedded loosely in narrative text | N-A | No steps in a Brief use case. |
| 10 | Naming of actors and use case title is consistent with the corresponding Use Case Diagram and User Stories | Pass | Title and actor match UCD-001 and US-001 exactly. |
| 11 | Scope/level (e.g. summary, user-goal, subfunction) is explicitly stated | Pass | Scope and user-goal level stated. |
| 12 | Use case is written from the actor's goal perspective, free of UI or implementation detail | Pass | Goal wording; the guides and secrets are named, no UI. |
## Overall Verdict
Go - all applicable criteria pass; the one finding (criterion 1) was fixed during the review. S01 gave the Go in chat on 2026-10-10, standing in for the other reviewers as ADR-0002 records; there is no independent reader.
## Action Items
| Action | Owner | Due |
| --- | --- | --- |
| None | - | - |
---
[UC-003]: ../../uc-003/uc.md
[QC-UC-001]: ../../../framework/qc/qc-use-case.md
[a2bf2d4]: https://git.tirsystem.com/TirSystem/github-action/commit/a2bf2d420416f7aff2badc6fe32a7690e2e523fd
docs/sqa/reviews/rc-024-uc-004.md
+52
View File
@@ -0,0 +1,52 @@
# Review Record: UC-004
## Metadata
| Key | Value |
| --- | --- |
| ID | RC-024 |
| CrossReference | [UC-004], [QC-UC-001] |
## Version History
| Date | Status | Author | Reviewer | Change | Commit |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 2026-10-10 | Accepted | Jens Tirsvad Nielsen | S01 | Initial version | [a2bf2d4] |
---
## Artifact Under Review
- Instance reviewed: [UC-004]
- Checklist used: [QC-UC-001] (Brief format)
## Checklist Results
| # | Criterion | Status | Evidence/Notes |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 1 | Consists of a single, concise paragraph summarizing only the primary success scenario | Pass | Finding fixed during this review: the paragraph also described the runner and no-category alternatives; it now summarizes only the main success scenario (the alternatives are in US-001.07 and US-001.08). |
| 2 | Written as an informal multi-paragraph narrative; may mention some alternate flows without formal structure | N-A | Format is Brief. |
| 3 | All standard sections are present: actors, preconditions, postconditions, main success scenario, alternative/exception flows | N-A | Format is Brief; the sections of a Brief use case are present (actor, stakeholders, pre- and postconditions, paragraph). |
| 4 | Preconditions and postconditions are explicitly defined | Pass | Both stated. |
| 5 | Primary actor is explicitly stated | Pass | DevOps Professional. |
| 6 | Stakeholders and their interests are stated | Pass | S-IDs from SA-001 with an interest each. |
| 7 | Main success scenario is written as clear, numbered steps | N-A | Format is Brief: one paragraph. |
| 8 | Alternative/exception flows correctly reference `<<include>>`/`<<extend>>` use cases where relevant, per UML 2.5.1 | N-A | No alternative flows in a Brief use case; the relationships are in UCD-001. |
| 9 | Explicit business rules are captured per step where applicable, rather than embedded loosely in narrative text | N-A | No steps in a Brief use case. |
| 10 | Naming of actors and use case title is consistent with the corresponding Use Case Diagram and User Stories | Pass | Title and actor match UCD-001 and US-001 exactly. |
| 11 | Scope/level (e.g. summary, user-goal, subfunction) is explicitly stated | Pass | Scope and user-goal level stated. |
| 12 | Use case is written from the actor's goal perspective, free of UI or implementation detail | Pass | Goal wording; the guides and secrets are named, no UI. |
## Overall Verdict
Go - all applicable criteria pass; the one finding (criterion 1) was fixed during the review. S01 gave the Go in chat on 2026-10-10, standing in for the other reviewers as ADR-0002 records; there is no independent reader.
## Action Items
| Action | Owner | Due |
| --- | --- | --- |
| None | - | - |
---
[UC-004]: ../../uc-004/uc.md
[QC-UC-001]: ../../../framework/qc/qc-use-case.md
[a2bf2d4]: https://git.tirsystem.com/TirSystem/github-action/commit/a2bf2d420416f7aff2badc6fe32a7690e2e523fd
docs/sqa/reviews/rc-025-pp-001-use-cases.md
+47
View File
@@ -0,0 +1,47 @@
# Review Record: PP-001 Project Plan (P1 use cases)
## Metadata
| Key | Value |
| --- | --- |
| ID | RC-025 |
| CrossReference | [PP-001], [BC-001] |
## Version History
| Date | Status | Author | Reviewer | Change | Commit |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 2026-10-10 | Accepted | Jens Tirsvad Nielsen | S01 | Initial version | [a2bf2d4] |
---
## Artifact Under Review
- Instance reviewed: [PP-001]
- Checklist used: none: the Project Plan has no QC checklist. Validated against the Business Case [BC-001] and the Go / No-Go criteria of each listed milestone, as `PP.md` prescribes.
## Checklist Results
| # | Criterion | Status | Evidence/Notes |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 1 | Every milestone in the plan has a `MIL-*` document and the plan's dates equal that document's target date | Pass | Unchanged. |
| 2 | Every Business Case scope item is covered by a gateway | Pass | Unchanged. |
| 3 | The schedule respects the Business Case constraints | Pass | Unchanged. |
| 4 | Dependencies between milestones are stated | Pass | Unchanged. |
| 5 | Every gateway has an owner who is a stakeholder ID | Pass | Unchanged. |
| 6 | Plan content is internally consistent | Pass | The appendix's use case candidates 1 to 4 correspond to UC-001 to UC-004; the plan cites US-001. |
| 7 | Open Issues are current | Pass | Finding fixed during this review: the item about use cases said the documents "need review". It now states that the P1 candidates are written as UC-001 to UC-004 with UCD-001 and US-001, and that P2 and P3 have none. |
## Overall Verdict
Go - all seven criteria pass; the one finding was fixed during the review. S01 gave the Go in chat on 2026-10-10, standing in for the other reviewers as ADR-0002 records; there is no independent reader.
## Action Items
| Action | Owner | Due |
| --- | --- | --- |
| None | - | - |
---
[PP-001]: ../../project-plan.md
[BC-001]: ../../business-case.md
[a2bf2d4]: https://git.tirsystem.com/TirSystem/github-action/commit/a2bf2d420416f7aff2badc6fe32a7690e2e523fd
docs/sqa/traceability-matrix.md
+33 -7
View File
@@ -4,13 +4,13 @@
| Key | Value |
| --- | --- |
| ID | TM-001 |
| CrossReference | [BC-001], [SA-001], [PP-001], [MIL-001], [MIL-002], [MIL-003], [MIL-004], [MIL-005], [MIL-006], [RC-001], [RC-002], [RC-003], [RC-004], [RC-005], [RC-006], [RC-007], [RC-008], [RC-009], [RC-010], [RC-011], [RC-012], [RC-013], [RC-014], [RC-015], [RC-016], [RC-017], [RC-018], [ADR-0001], [ADR-0002], [ADR-0003], [ADR-0004] |
| CrossReference | [BC-001], [SA-001], [PP-001], [MIL-001], [MIL-002], [MIL-003], [MIL-004], [MIL-005], [MIL-006], [RC-001], [RC-002], [RC-003], [RC-004], [RC-005], [RC-006], [RC-007], [RC-008], [RC-009], [RC-010], [RC-011], [RC-012], [RC-013], [RC-014], [RC-015], [RC-016], [RC-017], [RC-018], [RC-019], [RC-020], [RC-021], [RC-022], [RC-023], [RC-024], [RC-025], [UCD-001], [US-001], [UC-001], [UC-002], [UC-003], [UC-004], [ADR-0001], [ADR-0002], [ADR-0003], [ADR-0004] |
## Version History
| Date | Status | Author | Reviewer | Change | Commit |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 2026-10-10 | Deprecated | Jens Tirsvad Nielsen | S01 | Added RC-017 for PP-001 | [676a262] |
| 2026-10-10 | Accepted | Jens Tirsvad Nielsen | S01 | Added ADR-0004 and RC-018 | [b22a2cd] |
| 2026-10-10 | Deprecated | Jens Tirsvad Nielsen | S01 | Added ADR-0004 and RC-018 | [b22a2cd] |
| 2026-10-10 | Accepted | Jens Tirsvad Nielsen | S01 | Added UCD-001, US-001, UC-001 to UC-004 and RC-019 to RC-025 | [a2bf2d4] |
---
@@ -24,9 +24,9 @@ updated whenever an artifact instance is created or reviewed.
| Artifact Instance | Type | Upstream (Backward Link) | Downstream (Forward Link) | Last Reviewed (RC-ID) |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| [SA-001] | SA | - | [BC-001] | [RC-004] |
| [SA-001] | SA | - | [BC-001], [UCD-001] | [RC-004] |
| [BC-001] | BC | [SA-001] | [PP-001], [MIL-001], [MIL-002], [MIL-003], [MIL-004], [MIL-005], [MIL-006] | [RC-001], [RC-008] |
| [PP-001] | PP | [BC-001], [SA-001] | [MIL-001], [MIL-002], [MIL-003], [MIL-004], [MIL-005], [MIL-006] | [RC-002], [RC-009], [RC-015], [RC-017] |
| [PP-001] | PP | [BC-001], [SA-001] | [MIL-001], [MIL-002], [MIL-003], [MIL-004], [MIL-005], [MIL-006], [US-001] | [RC-002], [RC-009], [RC-015], [RC-017], [RC-025] |
| [MIL-001] | MIL | [BC-001], [PP-001] | [MIL-002] | [RC-003] |
| [MIL-002] | MIL | [BC-001], [PP-001], [MIL-001] | [MIL-003], [MIL-005] | [RC-005] |
| [MIL-003] | MIL | [BC-001], [PP-001], [MIL-002] | [MIL-004] | [RC-006] |
@@ -55,11 +55,24 @@ updated whenever an artifact instance is created or reviewed.
| [RC-016] | RC | [MIL-006] | - | - |
| [RC-017] | RC | [PP-001] | - | - |
| [RC-018] | RC | [ADR-0004] | - | - |
| [UCD-001] | UCD | [SA-001], [BC-001] | [US-001], [UC-001], [UC-002], [UC-003], [UC-004] | [RC-019] |
| [US-001] | US | [UCD-001], [BC-001], [MIL-001], [MIL-002] | [UC-001], [UC-002], [UC-003], [UC-004] | [RC-020] |
| [UC-001] | UC | [UCD-001], [US-001], [SA-001] | - | [RC-021] |
| [UC-002] | UC | [UCD-001], [US-001], [SA-001] | - | [RC-022] |
| [UC-003] | UC | [UCD-001], [US-001], [SA-001] | - | [RC-023] |
| [UC-004] | UC | [UCD-001], [US-001], [SA-001] | - | [RC-024] |
| [RC-019] | RC | [UCD-001] | - | - |
| [RC-020] | RC | [US-001] | - | - |
| [RC-021] | RC | [UC-001] | - | - |
| [RC-022] | RC | [UC-002] | - | - |
| [RC-023] | RC | [UC-003] | - | - |
| [RC-024] | RC | [UC-004] | - | - |
| [RC-025] | RC | [PP-001] | - | - |
## Coverage Notes
- `-` in Upstream means foundational (SA-001 has no prerequisite). In Downstream it means nothing is built on the instance yet. In Last Reviewed it means no `RC-*` exists (review records are not themselves reviewed).
- Types with no instance yet: KPI, BMC, BPMN, UCD, US, UC, SSD, DM, OC, SD, DCD, ERD, GOV, DICT. The Project Plan lists use case candidates, but the formal use cases wait for a use case diagram and user stories.
- Types with no instance yet: KPI, BMC, BPMN, SSD, DM, OC, SD, DCD, ERD, GOV, DICT. The four P1 use case candidates are written as brief use cases (UC-001 to UC-004); the P2 and P3 candidates have no use case document yet.
- PP-001 and TM-001 have no QC checklist; RC-002 validated PP-001 against its Business Case constraints and the milestone Go / No-Go criteria. TM-001 has no review record.
- All review records are `Accepted` after S01 stood in for S05 on 2026-10-10. The author and S01 are the same person, so an independent review by S05 is still open (see RC-001).
@@ -96,5 +109,18 @@ updated whenever an artifact instance is created or reviewed.
[RC-016]: ./reviews/rc-016-mil-006.md
[RC-017]: ./reviews/rc-017-project-plan-mil-006.md
[RC-018]: ./reviews/rc-018-adr-0004.md
[676a262]: https://git.tirsystem.com/TirSystem/github-action/commit/676a26240563338307c0454c3bf15b960bdb58ca
[UCD-001]: ../use-case-diagram.md
[US-001]: ../user-stories.md
[UC-001]: ../uc-001/uc.md
[UC-002]: ../uc-002/uc.md
[UC-003]: ../uc-003/uc.md
[UC-004]: ../uc-004/uc.md
[RC-019]: ./reviews/rc-019-ucd-001.md
[RC-020]: ./reviews/rc-020-us-001.md
[RC-021]: ./reviews/rc-021-uc-001.md
[RC-022]: ./reviews/rc-022-uc-002.md
[RC-023]: ./reviews/rc-023-uc-003.md
[RC-024]: ./reviews/rc-024-uc-004.md
[RC-025]: ./reviews/rc-025-pp-001-use-cases.md
[b22a2cd]: https://git.tirsystem.com/TirSystem/github-action/commit/b22a2cd59235078656c4440b945b787f88fbd345
[a2bf2d4]: https://git.tirsystem.com/TirSystem/github-action/commit/a2bf2d420416f7aff2badc6fe32a7690e2e523fd
docs/uc-001/uc.md
+43
View File
@@ -0,0 +1,43 @@
# UC-001: Synchronize Repository Metadata
## Metadata
| Key | Value |
| --- | --- |
| ID | UC-001 |
| CrossReference | [UCD-001], [US-001], [SA-001] |
## Version History
| Date | Status | Author | Reviewer | Change | Commit |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 2026-10-10 | Accepted | Jens Tirsvad Nielsen | S01 | Initial version | [a2bf2d4] |
---
**Format:** Brief
**Title:** Synchronize Repository Metadata
**Scope:** Reusable Workflow Collection
**Level:** user-goal
**Primary Actor:** DevOps Professional
**Stakeholders:** S05, S04 (interests below)
**Stories:** US-001.01, US-001.02
## Brief
A push to `main`, a manual run or the daily schedule starts the workflow. It checks that both tokens are accepted and that the GitHub token can administer the mirror, reads the description and topics from Gitea, finds the single GitHub push mirror, and sets the description and replaces the topics on GitHub. The run ends with a line that names the repository it synchronized.
**Stakeholder interests**
- S05 — the mirror shows what the primary repository shows, with no manual copying
- S04 — the description and topics on the mirror are correct and current
**Preconditions:** The repository has Actions enabled and a runner, both secrets are stored, and at most one GitHub push mirror is configured.
**Postconditions (success guarantee):** The description and topics of the GitHub mirror equal those of the Gitea repository, or the run ended without a change and said why.
---
[UCD-001]: ../use-case-diagram.md
[US-001]: ../user-stories.md
[SA-001]: ../stakeholder-analysis.md
[a2bf2d4]: https://git.tirsystem.com/TirSystem/github-action/commit/a2bf2d420416f7aff2badc6fe32a7690e2e523fd
docs/uc-002/uc.md
+44
View File
@@ -0,0 +1,44 @@
# UC-002: Configure Workflow Credentials
## Metadata
| Key | Value |
| --- | --- |
| ID | UC-002 |
| CrossReference | [UCD-001], [US-001], [SA-001] |
## Version History
| Date | Status | Author | Reviewer | Change | Commit |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 2026-10-10 | Accepted | Jens Tirsvad Nielsen | S01 | Initial version | [a2bf2d4] |
---
**Format:** Brief
**Title:** Configure Workflow Credentials
**Scope:** Reusable Workflow Collection
**Level:** user-goal
**Primary Actor:** DevOps Professional
**Stakeholders:** S05, S03, S02 (interests below)
**Stories:** US-001.03, US-001.04
## Brief
The DevOps Professional creates a Gitea token and a GitHub fine-grained token with the minimum permissions in the credentials guide, and the Platform Operator stores them once as secrets of the organization, each holding only the token. A run of the workflow checks that each token is accepted and, for GitHub, that it can administer the mirror, and reports `Preflight passed` without printing any secret value.
**Stakeholder interests**
- S05 — credentials are least-privilege and checked before use
- S03 — tokens are scoped, stored as secrets and never printed
- S02 — a failed credential check says which secret to fix
**Preconditions:** The actor has access to the Gitea and GitHub settings and can store secrets for the organization.
**Postconditions (success guarantee):** Both secrets hold only a token, a run passes the credential check with the documented minimum permissions, and no secret value appeared in a log.
---
[UCD-001]: ../use-case-diagram.md
[US-001]: ../user-stories.md
[SA-001]: ../stakeholder-analysis.md
[a2bf2d4]: https://git.tirsystem.com/TirSystem/github-action/commit/a2bf2d420416f7aff2badc6fe32a7690e2e523fd
docs/uc-003/uc.md
+44
View File
@@ -0,0 +1,44 @@
# UC-003: Onboard a Repository
## Metadata
| Key | Value |
| --- | --- |
| ID | UC-003 |
| CrossReference | [UCD-001], [US-001], [SA-001] |
## Version History
| Date | Status | Author | Reviewer | Change | Commit |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 2026-10-10 | Accepted | Jens Tirsvad Nielsen | S01 | Initial version | [a2bf2d4] |
---
**Format:** Brief
**Title:** Onboard a Repository
**Scope:** Reusable Workflow Collection
**Level:** user-goal
**Primary Actor:** DevOps Professional
**Stakeholders:** S05, S02, S03 (interests below)
**Stories:** US-001.05, US-001.06
## Brief
The DevOps Professional follows the onboarding guide for a repository: checks that Actions and a runner are available, configures the GitHub push mirror, includes the credential configuration for the organization if it is not done yet, sets a description and topics, and triggers a first run. Scoped delivery runs the shared workflow in the repository without a copy, and the log ends with the synchronized repository.
**Stakeholder interests**
- S05 — a repository gets the standard automation without copying workflow files
- S02 — onboarding is quick and needs no undocumented step
- S03 — a repository uses only supported runners and its organization's secrets
**Preconditions:** Actions are enabled in the repository, a runner with the needed label is online, and the secrets can be stored for the repository's organization.
**Postconditions (success guarantee):** The first run in the repository passes using only the onboarding guide, and the repository needs no copy of the workflow.
---
[UCD-001]: ../use-case-diagram.md
[US-001]: ../user-stories.md
[SA-001]: ../stakeholder-analysis.md
[a2bf2d4]: https://git.tirsystem.com/TirSystem/github-action/commit/a2bf2d420416f7aff2badc6fe32a7690e2e523fd
docs/uc-004/uc.md
+43
View File
@@ -0,0 +1,43 @@
# UC-004: Diagnose a Failed Workflow
## Metadata
| Key | Value |
| --- | --- |
| ID | UC-004 |
| CrossReference | [UCD-001], [US-001], [SA-001] |
## Version History
| Date | Status | Author | Reviewer | Change | Commit |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 2026-10-10 | Accepted | Jens Tirsvad Nielsen | S01 | Initial version | [a2bf2d4] |
---
**Format:** Brief
**Title:** Diagnose a Failed Workflow
**Scope:** Reusable Workflow Collection
**Level:** user-goal
**Primary Actor:** DevOps Professional
**Stakeholders:** S05, S03 (interests below)
**Stories:** US-001.07, US-001.08
## Brief
The DevOps Professional or the Platform Operator opens the failed run, reads the last lines of the failing step and takes the category from the message. The troubleshooting guide maps that category and message to a cause and a fix, which is applied, and the workflow is run again.
**Stakeholder interests**
- S05 — the cause of a failure is found quickly and fixed once
- S03 — a runner or secret problem is recognised as such and not blamed on the workflow
**Preconditions:** A run failed or did not start, and the actor can read the run log.
**Postconditions (success guarantee):** The cause is placed in one category (configuration, credentials, permissions, API response or runner) and the fix from the guide is applied or a defect is raised.
---
[UCD-001]: ../use-case-diagram.md
[US-001]: ../user-stories.md
[SA-001]: ../stakeholder-analysis.md
[a2bf2d4]: https://git.tirsystem.com/TirSystem/github-action/commit/a2bf2d420416f7aff2badc6fe32a7690e2e523fd
docs/use-case-diagram.md
+93
View File
@@ -0,0 +1,93 @@
# Use Case Diagram
## Metadata
| Key | Value |
| --- | --- |
| ID | UCD-001 |
| CrossReference | [SA-001], [BC-001], [US-001], [UC-001], [UC-002], [UC-003], [UC-004] |
## Version History
| Date | Status | Author | Reviewer | Change | Commit |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 2026-10-10 | Accepted | Jens Tirsvad Nielsen | S01 | Initial version | [a2bf2d4] |
---
## Purpose and Scope
The boundary is the reusable workflow collection of this repository: the
Gitea Actions workflows, their credential checks and the guides that go with
them. Inside it are the four P1 goals of the Project Plan: keeping the GitHub
mirror's description and topics equal to Gitea's, configuring the credentials
a workflow needs, bringing a repository onto the shared workflows, and finding
the cause of a failed run. Gitea and GitHub are outside the boundary and are
shown as external systems. Quality checks and releases (P2) and the software
engineer's use cases (P2, P3) are not drawn yet.
## Diagram
```plantuml
@startuml
left to right direction
skinparam packageStyle rectangle
actor "DevOps Professional" as DevOps <<Actor>>
actor "Platform Operator" as Operator <<Actor>>
actor "Gitea Instance" as Gitea <<System>>
actor "GitHub" as GitHub <<System>>
rectangle "Reusable Workflow Collection" <<System>> {
usecase "Synchronize Repository Metadata" as UC1
usecase "Configure Workflow Credentials" as UC2
usecase "Onboard a Repository" as UC3
usecase "Diagnose a Failed Workflow" as UC4
}
DevOps --> UC1
DevOps --> UC2
DevOps --> UC3
DevOps --> UC4
Operator --> UC2
Operator --> UC4
UC1 --> Gitea
UC1 --> GitHub
UC3 ..> UC2 : <<include>>
UC4 ..> UC1 : <<extend>>
@enduml
```
## Actor Table
| Actor | Stereotype | Stakeholder ID (SA) | Goals (use cases) |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| DevOps Professional | `<<Actor>>` | S05 | Synchronize Repository Metadata, Configure Workflow Credentials, Onboard a Repository, Diagnose a Failed Workflow |
| Platform Operator | `<<Actor>>` | S03 | Configure Workflow Credentials, Diagnose a Failed Workflow |
| Gitea Instance | `<<System>>` | - | Synchronize Repository Metadata (source of description and topics) |
| GitHub | `<<System>>` | S04 (audience of the mirror) | Synchronize Repository Metadata (target) |
## Use Case Table
| Use Case | Actor(s) | Goal |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Synchronize Repository Metadata | DevOps Professional | The GitHub mirror shows the Gitea description and topics |
| Configure Workflow Credentials | DevOps Professional, Platform Operator | Least-privilege tokens that a workflow accepts |
| Onboard a Repository | DevOps Professional | A repository consumes the shared workflows |
| Diagnose a Failed Workflow | DevOps Professional, Platform Operator | The cause of a failed run is found and placed in a category |
## Relationships
| Relationship | Justification |
| --- | --- |
| Onboard a Repository `<<include>>` Configure Workflow Credentials | Every onboarding needs working credentials; the behaviour is always part of it and is also used on its own when a token is rotated. |
| Diagnose a Failed Workflow `<<extend>>` Synchronize Repository Metadata | The extension applies only when a run of the synchronization has failed; the synchronization is complete without it. |
---
[SA-001]: ./stakeholder-analysis.md
[BC-001]: ./business-case.md
[US-001]: ./user-stories.md
[UC-001]: ./uc-001/uc.md
[UC-002]: ./uc-002/uc.md
[UC-003]: ./uc-003/uc.md
[UC-004]: ./uc-004/uc.md
[a2bf2d4]: https://git.tirsystem.com/TirSystem/github-action/commit/a2bf2d420416f7aff2badc6fe32a7690e2e523fd
docs/user-stories.md
+150
View File
@@ -0,0 +1,150 @@
# User Story
## Metadata
| Key | Value |
| --- | --- |
| ID | US-001 |
| CrossReference | [UCD-001], [BC-001], [MIL-001], [MIL-002], [UC-001], [UC-002], [UC-003], [UC-004] |
## Version History
| Date | Status | Author | Reviewer | Change | Commit |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 2026-10-10 | Accepted | Jens Tirsvad Nielsen | S01 | Initial version | [a2bf2d4] |
---
## Purpose and Scope
These stories cover the P1 use cases of the Project Plan that MIL-002 delivers
(O1 to O3 of [BC-001]): keeping the mirror metadata correct, configuring
credentials, onboarding a repository and diagnosing a failed run. Roles are the
actors of [UCD-001]. Stories for quality checks and releases (MIL-003,
MIL-004) and for the wiki (MIL-005, MIL-006) are not written yet.
## Story List
### US-001.01 — Mirror shows the Gitea metadata
**As a** DevOps Professional, **I want** the GitHub mirror to show the description and topics of the Gitea repository, **so that** visitors of the mirror see the same repository metadata as on the primary repository.
**Acceptance Criteria**
- Given a repository with one GitHub push mirror, when the workflow runs, then the GitHub description and topics equal the Gitea ones.
- Given the description or the topics changed on Gitea, when the next run completes, then the GitHub mirror shows the new values.
| Traces to | Size | INVEST exceptions |
| --- | --- | --- |
| [UC-001], [MIL-002] | fits one iteration | none |
### US-001.02 — Repository without a mirror is skipped
**As a** DevOps Professional, **I want** a repository without a GitHub mirror to be skipped successfully, **so that** repositories that have no mirror do not show failed runs.
**Acceptance Criteria**
- Given a repository with no GitHub push mirror, when the workflow runs, then the run succeeds and the log says that there is nothing to sync.
- Given a repository with several GitHub push mirrors, when the workflow runs, then the run fails with a configuration message and changes nothing.
| Traces to | Size | INVEST exceptions |
| --- | --- | --- |
| [UC-001], [MIL-002] | fits one iteration | none |
### US-001.03 — Check the tokens before changing anything
**As a** DevOps Professional, **I want** both tokens to be checked before the workflow changes anything, **so that** a wrong or too weak token is found without any side effect.
**Acceptance Criteria**
- Given a token that GitHub rejects, when the workflow runs, then nothing is changed and the log names the credentials category.
- Given a GitHub token without administration access, when the workflow runs, then it stops with a permissions message before the first change.
| Traces to | Size | INVEST exceptions |
| --- | --- | --- |
| [UC-002], [MIL-002] | fits one iteration | none |
### US-001.04 — Store the secrets once per organization
**As a** Platform Operator, **I want** to store a workflow's secrets once for an organization, **so that** every repository of the organization can use the workflow without its own copy of the secrets.
**Acceptance Criteria**
- Given the secrets are stored for an organization, when a repository of that organization runs the workflow, then it passes the credential check.
- Given a repository of another organization, when it runs the workflow, then it does not see these secrets and the log names the missing secret.
| Traces to | Size | INVEST exceptions |
| --- | --- | --- |
| [UC-002], [MIL-002] | fits one iteration | none |
### US-001.05 — Use the workflow without a copy
**As a** DevOps Professional, **I want** a repository to use the shared workflow without copying it, **so that** a fix made once reaches every repository.
**Acceptance Criteria**
- Given a repository without its own workflow files, when a push is made to `main`, then the shared workflow runs in it.
- Given the shared workflow changes, when the next run starts in another repository, then it runs the changed version.
| Traces to | Size | INVEST exceptions |
| --- | --- | --- |
| [UC-003], [MIL-002] | fits one iteration | none |
### US-001.06 — Onboard from one guide
**As a** DevOps Professional, **I want** to onboard a repository by following one guide, **so that** the first run passes without undocumented steps.
**Acceptance Criteria**
- Given a repository with Actions enabled and a runner, when its owner follows only the onboarding guide, then the first run succeeds.
- Given a step of the guide is wrong or missing, when it is found during onboarding, then it is raised as a defect of the guide.
| Traces to | Size | INVEST exceptions |
| --- | --- | --- |
| [UC-003], [MIL-002] | fits one iteration | none |
### US-001.07 — Every failure names its category
**As a** DevOps Professional, **I want** every failure message to name its category, **so that** I know at once whether to look at configuration, credentials, permissions, the service or the runner.
**Acceptance Criteria**
- Given any failure of the workflow, when its log is read, then the message starts with one of the categories configuration, credentials, permissions or api.
- Given a message that has no category, when it is found, then it is raised as a defect.
| Traces to | Size | INVEST exceptions |
| --- | --- | --- |
| [UC-004], [MIL-002] | fits one iteration | none |
### US-001.08 — Recognise a runner problem
**As a** Platform Operator, **I want** to recognise a runner problem from its symptom, **so that** I fix the runner and not the workflow.
**Acceptance Criteria**
- Given a run that stays waiting, when the troubleshooting guide is read, then it names the missing runner label as the cause.
- Given a job that fails before the script, when the guide is read, then it names the tool missing from the runner image.
| Traces to | Size | INVEST exceptions |
| --- | --- | --- |
| [UC-004], [MIL-002] | fits one iteration | none |
## INVEST Check
All eight stories are independent of each other except that US-001.05 and
US-001.06 build on US-001.04 (the secrets must exist before a repository can
run the workflow). Each states one goal and can be negotiated, delivers value
to the named role, is small enough for one iteration, and has acceptance
criteria that are checked with a run or a read of the guide. Exception:
US-001.01 and US-001.02 are already implemented and are written so that their
behaviour is tested rather than built.
---
[UCD-001]: ./use-case-diagram.md
[BC-001]: ./business-case.md
[MIL-001]: ./milestones/mil-001-stabilise-metadata-sync.md
[MIL-002]: ./milestones/mil-002-onboarding-and-operations.md
[UC-001]: ./uc-001/uc.md
[UC-002]: ./uc-002/uc.md
[UC-003]: ./uc-003/uc.md
[UC-004]: ./uc-004/uc.md
[a2bf2d4]: https://git.tirsystem.com/TirSystem/github-action/commit/a2bf2d420416f7aff2badc6fe32a7690e2e523fd