Introducing report_running() by TimoSteuerwaldETAS · Pull Request #239 · eclipse-score/lifecycle

TimoSteuerwaldETAS · 2026-06-09T09:10:28Z

Introduces a low-level void report_running() function so applications can report a Running state without requiring usage of the full mw::Lifecycle API.
This was decided in one of the weekly lifecycle meetings and documented in ticket #140

This PR introduces the API.
Follow-up PR will then remove the existing LifecycleClient class from public visibility.

github-actions · 2026-06-09T09:11:19Z

License Check Results

🚀 The license check job ran with the Bazel command:

bazel run --lockfile_mode=error //:license-check

Status: ⚠️ Needs Review

Click to expand output

[License Check Output]
Extracting Bazel installation...
Starting local Bazel server (8.4.2) and connecting to it...
INFO: Invocation ID: 28fa91b2-9da4-48eb-ba97-5fc4e36970d2
Computing main repo mapping: 
Computing main repo mapping: 
Loading: 
Loading: 0 packages loaded
Loading: 0 packages loaded
Loading: 0 packages loaded
    currently loading: 
Loading: 0 packages loaded
    currently loading: 
Loading: 0 packages loaded
    currently loading: 
Analyzing: target //:license-check (1 packages loaded, 0 targets configured)
Analyzing: target //:license-check (1 packages loaded, 0 targets configured)

Analyzing: target //:license-check (29 packages loaded, 10 targets configured)

Analyzing: target //:license-check (83 packages loaded, 10 targets configured)

Analyzing: target //:license-check (86 packages loaded, 10 targets configured)

Analyzing: target //:license-check (133 packages loaded, 2487 targets configured)

Analyzing: target //:license-check (145 packages loaded, 7476 targets configured)

Analyzing: target //:license-check (152 packages loaded, 8045 targets configured)

Analyzing: target //:license-check (157 packages loaded, 8094 targets configured)

Analyzing: target //:license-check (158 packages loaded, 8218 targets configured)

Analyzing: target //:license-check (160 packages loaded, 9335 targets configured)

INFO: Analyzed target //:license-check (162 packages loaded, 10232 targets configured).
[12 / 16] JavaToolchainCompileClasses external/rules_java+/toolchains/platformclasspath_classes; 0s disk-cache, processwrapper-sandbox ... (2 actions, 1 running)
[15 / 16] [Prepa] Building license.check.license_check.jar ()
INFO: Found 1 target...
Target //:license.check.license_check up-to-date:
  bazel-bin/license.check.license_check
  bazel-bin/license.check.license_check.jar
INFO: Elapsed time: 23.298s, Critical Path: 2.92s
INFO: 16 processes: 12 internal, 3 processwrapper-sandbox, 1 worker.
INFO: Build completed successfully, 16 total actions
INFO: Running command line: bazel-bin/license.check.license_check ./formatted.txt <args omitted>
usage: org.eclipse.dash.licenses.cli.Main [-batch <int>] [-cd <url>]
       [-confidence <int>] [-ef <url>] [-excludeSources <sources>] [-help] [-lic
       <url>] [-project <shortname>] [-repo <url>] [-review] [-summary <file>]
       [-timeout <seconds>] [-token <token>]

github-actions · 2026-06-09T09:15:05Z

The created documentation from the pull request is available at: docu-html

NicolasFussberger · 2026-06-09T09:55:17Z

@@ -0,0 +1,23 @@
+/********************************************************************************
+ * Copyright (c) 2025 Contributors to the Eclipse Foundation


Maybe new code should use 2026 copyright year

NicolasFussberger · 2026-06-09T09:56:05Z

+    tags = ["FUSA"],
+    deps = [
+        ":lifecycle_client",
+        "@score_baselibs//score/mw/log",


I don't see a direct dependency to mw::log in the report_running impl.

NicolasFussberger · 2026-06-09T09:58:03Z

+
+#include "score/mw/lifecycle/lifecycle_client/report_running.h"
+
+#include "score/mw/log/logging.h"


header to be removed

NicolasFussberger · 2026-06-09T09:58:14Z

+#include "score/mw/lifecycle/lifecycle_client/report_running.h"
+
+#include "score/mw/log/logging.h"
+#include <score/mw/lifecycle/lifecycle_client.h>


Should this be:

Suggested change

#include <score/mw/lifecycle/lifecycle_client.h>

#include "score/mw/lifecycle/lifecycle_client.h"

NicolasFussberger · 2026-06-09T10:07:33Z

+    srcs = ["src/report_running.cpp"],
+    hdrs = ["src/report_running.h"],
+    features = COMPILER_WARNING_FEATURES,
+    include_prefix = "score/mw/lifecycle/lifecycle_client",


Should this be ?

Suggested change

include_prefix = "score/mw/lifecycle/lifecycle_client",

include_prefix = "score/mw/lifecycle",

Consumer should include the file via
#include "score/mw/lifecycle/report_running.h"

NicolasFussberger · 2026-06-09T10:11:20Z

+    features = COMPILER_WARNING_FEATURES,
+    include_prefix = "score/mw/lifecycle/lifecycle_client",
+    strip_include_prefix = "/score/launch_manager/lifecycle_client/src",
+    visibility = ["//visibility:public"],


I think this should be restricted visibility

Suggested change

visibility = ["//visibility:public"],

visibility = ["//score:__subpackages__"],

only the targets in score/launch_manager/BUILD are the public targets.

If I remember correctly, the report_running should just become part of the lifecycle_cc target

NicolasFussberger · 2026-06-10T13:05:15Z

+    ],
+)
+
 filegroup(


We should check if this can be removed. I don't see any usage

Yes, can be removed.

NicolasFussberger · 2026-06-10T13:05:42Z

We should check if this entire thing can be removed. I don't see any usage of it.

As github can not show me to which line of code this comment belongs, please check yourself if this has been fixed.

NicolasFussberger · 2026-06-10T13:07:08Z

I wonder why there is a target that compiles again all these sources that already exist in individual libraries.

Ideally, there are individual private libraries and one target that only lists them as dependencies

Yes. This was needed in first place to build the rust supervised app, however as the rust supervised app only uses the old internal lifecycle client, I could adapt it accordingly. Now it is no longer needed.

NicolasFussberger · 2026-06-12T09:44:38Z

@@ -32,21 +32,6 @@ cc_library(

 cc_library(


This still exposes multiple includes paths.
For client code both include paths are working:

#include <score/mw/lifecycle/lifecycle_client/application.h> #include <score/mw/lifecycle/lifecycle_client/runapplication.h> #include <score/mw/lifecycle/application.h> #include <score/mw/lifecycle/runapplication.h>

Can we restrict this only to the latter one?

NicolasFussberger · 2026-06-12T09:55:46Z

 use std::ffi::CString;
 use std::marker::PhantomData;

-#[link(name = "lifecycle_client")]


should this be corrected instead of being removed completely?

TimoSteuerwaldETAS requested a deployment to workflow-approval June 9, 2026 09:10 — with GitHub Actions Waiting

NicolasFussberger reviewed Jun 9, 2026

View reviewed changes

TimoSteuerwaldETAS added 2 commits June 9, 2026 15:53

Initial report_running files

2ca67bf

Update LifeCycleManager to use report_running()

9a9be83

TimoSteuerwaldETAS force-pushed the feature/replace_lifecycle_client_with_report_running_step_1 branch from 250bb36 to 9a9be83 Compare June 10, 2026 06:37

TimoSteuerwaldETAS requested a deployment to workflow-approval June 10, 2026 06:37 — with GitHub Actions Waiting

Update year in copyright

e89771f

TimoSteuerwaldETAS requested a deployment to workflow-approval June 10, 2026 08:23 — with GitHub Actions Waiting

Remove mw::log dependency, adjust include prefix & visibility

90b403e

TimoSteuerwaldETAS requested a deployment to workflow-approval June 10, 2026 11:53 — with GitHub Actions Waiting

NicolasFussberger reviewed Jun 10, 2026

View reviewed changes

TimoSteuerwaldETAS added 2 commits June 10, 2026 15:52

Rename lifecycleclient.cpp to lifecycle_client.cpp

11d7641

Add internal bazel target for old-school LifecycleClient

89582c0

TimoSteuerwaldETAS requested a deployment to workflow-approval June 10, 2026 13:53 — with GitHub Actions Waiting

TimoSteuerwaldETAS added 2 commits June 10, 2026 17:58

UT for score::mw::lifecycle::Run - generated by AI

7f1c411

Get rid of uninteresting mock calls

d767092

TimoSteuerwaldETAS requested a deployment to workflow-approval June 10, 2026 16:16 — with GitHub Actions Waiting

TimoSteuerwaldETAS added 2 commits June 11, 2026 13:27

Mock targets invisible outside of package

4da40df

Build breaks on rust_supervised_app

128e186

TimoSteuerwaldETAS requested a deployment to workflow-approval June 11, 2026 13:11 — with GitHub Actions Waiting

TimoSteuerwaldETAS added 2 commits June 11, 2026 18:09

Fix rust_supervised_app

09e0be8

Drop no longer needed dependency

9673905

TimoSteuerwaldETAS requested a deployment to workflow-approval June 11, 2026 16:45 — with GitHub Actions Waiting

Clean up in build file

40c0ae2

TimoSteuerwaldETAS force-pushed the feature/replace_lifecycle_client_with_report_running_step_1 branch from 681c575 to 40c0ae2 Compare June 11, 2026 17:03

TimoSteuerwaldETAS requested a deployment to workflow-approval June 11, 2026 17:03 — with GitHub Actions Waiting

NicolasFussberger reviewed Jun 12, 2026

View reviewed changes

		@@ -0,0 +1,23 @@
		/********************************************************************************
		* Copyright (c) 2025 Contributors to the Eclipse Foundation


		#include "score/mw/lifecycle/lifecycle_client/report_running.h"

		#include "score/mw/log/logging.h"

	#include <score/mw/lifecycle/lifecycle_client.h>
	#include "score/mw/lifecycle/lifecycle_client.h"

	include_prefix = "score/mw/lifecycle/lifecycle_client",
	include_prefix = "score/mw/lifecycle",

	visibility = ["//visibility:public"],
	visibility = ["//score:__subpackages__"],

Conversation

TimoSteuerwaldETAS commented Jun 9, 2026 • edited by NicolasFussberger Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Jun 9, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

License Check Results

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Jun 9, 2026

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants

TimoSteuerwaldETAS commented Jun 9, 2026 •

edited by NicolasFussberger

Loading

github-actions Bot commented Jun 9, 2026 •

edited

Loading