QUALITY_DECLARATION

This document is a declaration of software quality for the rcl_logging_spdlog package, based on the guidelines in REP-2004.

rcl_logging_spdlog Quality Declaration

The package rcl_logging_spdlog claims to be in the Quality Level 1 category.

Below are the rationales, notes, and caveats for this claim, organized by each requirement listed in the Package Quality Categories in REP-2004 of the ROS2 developer guide.

Version Policy [1]

Version Scheme [1.i]

rcl_logging_spdlog uses semver according to the recommendation for ROS Core packages in the ROS 2 Developer Guide.

Version Stability [1.ii]

Currently this package it is not at or above a stable version, i.e. >= 1.0.0.

Public API Declaration [1.iii]

All symbols in the installed headers are considered part of the public API.

All installed headers are in the include directory of the package, headers in any other folders are not installed and considered private.

API Stability Policy [1.iv]

rcl_logging_spdlog will not break public API within a released ROS distribution, i.e. no major releases once the ROS distribution is released.

ABI Stability Policy [1.v]

rcl_logging_spdlog contains C code and therefore must be concerned with ABI stability, and will maintain ABI stability within a ROS distribution.

ABI and ABI Stability Within a Released ROS Distribution [1.vi]

rcl_logging_spdlog will not break API nor ABI within a released ROS distribution, i.e. no major releases once the ROS distribution is released.

Change Control Process [2]

rcl_logging_spdlog follows the recommended guidelines for ROS Core packages in the ROS 2 Developer Guide.

Change Requests [2.i]

All changes will occur through a pull request, check ROS 2 Developer Guide for additional information.

Contributor Origin [2.ii]

This package uses DCO as its confirmation of contributor origin policy. More information can be found in CONTRIBUTING

Peer Review Policy [2.iii]

Following the recommended guidelines in the ROS 2 Developer Guide all pull requests must have at least 1 peer review.

Continuous Integration [2.iv]

All pull requests must pass CI on all tier 1 platforms

Currently nightly results can be seen here:

• linux-aarch64_release

• linux_release

• mac_osx_release

• windows_release

Documentation Policy [2.v]

All pull requests must resolve related documentation changes before merging.

Documentation [3]

Feature Documentation [3.i]

rcl_logging_spdlog has a documented feature list and it is hosted here.

Public API Documentation [3.ii]

rcl_logging_spdlog has documentation of its public API and it is hosted here.

License [3.iii]

The license for rcl_logging_spdlog is Apache 2.0, and a summary is in each source file, the type is declared in the manifest file, and a full copy of the license is in the file.

There is an automated test which runs a linter that ensures each file has a license statement. Here can be found a list with the latest results of the various linters being run on the package.

Copyright Statements [3.iv]

The copyright holders each provide a statement of copyright in each source code file in rcl_logging_spdlog.

There is an automated test which runs a linter that ensures each file has at least one copyright statement. Latest linter result report can be seen here.

Testing [4]

Feature Testing [4.i]

Each feature in rcl_logging_spdlog has corresponding tests which simulate typical usage, and they are located in the directory. New features are required to have tests before being added.

Currently nightly test results can be seen here:

• linux-aarch64_release

• linux_release

• mac_osx_release

• windows_release

Public API Testing [4.ii]

Each part of the public API has tests, and new additions or changes to the public API require tests before being added. The tests aim to cover both typical usage and corner cases, but are quantified by contributing to code coverage.

Coverage [4.iii]

rcl_logging_spdlog follows the recommendations for ROS Core packages in the ROS 2 Developer Guide, and opts to use line coverage instead of branch coverage.

This includes:

• tracking and reporting line coverage statistics

• achieving and maintaining a reasonable branch line coverage (90-100%)

• no lines are manually skipped in coverage calculations

Changes are required to make a best effort to keep or increase coverage before being accepted, but decreases are allowed if properly justified and accepted by reviewers.

Current coverage statistics can be viewed here. A description of how coverage statistics are calculated is summarized in this page “ROS 2 Onboarding Guide”.

Performance [4.iv]

rcl_logging_spdlog follows the recommendations for performance testing of C code in the ROS 2 Developer Guide, and opts to do performance analysis on each release rather than each change.

Package and system level performance benchmarks that cover features of rcl_logging_spdlog can be found at:

• Benchmarks

• Performance

Changes that introduce regressions in performance must be adequately justified in order to be accepted and merged.

Linters and Static Analysis [4.v]

rcl_logging_spdlog uses and passes all the standard linters and static analysis tools for a C package as described in the ROS 2 Developer Guide. Passing implies there are no linter/static errors when testing against CI of supported platforms.

Currently nightly results can be seen here:

• linux-aarch64_release

• linux_release

• mac_osx_release

• windows_release

Dependencies [5]

Below are evaluations of each of rcl_logging_spdlog’s run-time and build-time dependencies that have been determined to influence the quality.

rcl_logging_spdlog depends on the ROS packages rcutils and spdlog_vendor.

Optional Direct Runtime ROS Dependencies [5.ii]

rcl_logging_spdlog has no optional Direct Runtime ROS dependencies that need to be considered for this declaration.

Direct Runtime non-ROS Dependency [5.iii]

rcl_logging_spdlog has a Direct Runtime non-ROS dependency on the spdlog library. It was declared to be Quality Level 1 here.

Platform Support [6]

rcl_logging_spdlog supports all of the tier 1 platforms as described in REP-2000, and tests each change against all of them.

Security [7]

Vulnerability Disclosure Policy [7.i]

This package conforms to the Vulnerability Disclosure Policy in REP-2006.

Current status Summary

The chart below compares the requirements in the REP-2004 with the current state of the rcl package.

Number	Requirement	Current state
1	Version policy	—
1.i	Version Policy available	✓
1.ii	Stable version	✓
1.iii	Declared public API	✓
1.iv	API stability policy	✓
1.v	ABI stability policy	✓
1.vi_	API/ABI stable within ros distribution	✓
2	Change control process	—
2.i	All changes occur on change request	✓
2.ii	Contributor origin (DCO, CLA, etc)	✓
2.iii	Peer review policy	✓
2.iv	CI policy for change requests	✓
2.v	Documentation policy for change requests	✓
3	Documentation	—
3.i	Per feature documentation	✓
3.ii	Per public API item documentation	✓
3.iii	Declared License(s)	✓
3.iv	Copyright in source files	✓
3.v.a	Quality declaration linked to README	✓
3.v.b	Centralized declaration available for peer review	✓
4	Testing	—
4.i	Feature items tests	✓
4.ii	Public API tests	✓
4.iii.a	Using coverage	✓
4.iii.a	Coverage policy	✓
4.iv.a	Performance tests (if applicable)	✓
4.iv.b	Performance tests policy	✓
4.v.a	Code style enforcement (linters)	✓
4.v.b	Use of static analysis tools	✓
5	Dependencies	—
5.i	Must not have ROS lower level dependencies	✓
5.ii	Optional ROS lower level dependencies	✓
5.iii	Justifies quality use of non-ROS dependencies	✓
6	Platform support	—
6.i	Support targets Tier1 ROS platforms	✓
7	Security	—
7.i	Vulnerability Disclosure Policy	✓