Workspace restructuring

[aschaal]

When the workspace structure was initially created, it was absolutely fine. After several additions, it's still good, but there are some minor inconsistencies and obscurities now.

This discussion it not about changing fundamentals like how to create modules or the build system.
It's about slightly improving the workspace structure, similar to what already exists.

The idea below was already presented in the public Eclipse "OpenBSW Monthly Call" and the participants basically agreed to it. Feel free to comment on the idea.

First, some thoughts:

• There are several "safety" subfolders. These modules usually only make sense in safety context, but they could be also used in QM. Some other modules are usually for QM, but may be developed "ASIL capable". We can annotate that in module.spec. For "security", this is even harder, as for security a whole bunch of modules must be developed "CAL capable". And what should we do if a module is safety AND security relevant? So I would merge safety and security modules into the other folders like bsp, bsw and os.
• On the learning pages, the "os" folder is mentioned, but it does not exist yet. We should move modules like async into it.
• executables/unitTest does not include a main project, but provides mocks and configs. This is confusing on first sight, but can be easily solved by adding subfolders, see below.
• The module "application" is a lib! I think we should rename it to avoid confusion (any maybe split in a second step). The main module (with the main() function) is called "main" already.
• There many ways how to structure the modules, e.g.: "libs/platforms/..." or "platforms/libs/..." For me, it's way more natural to first cluster the platforms, then the type like libs or configs.
• Side note: a mock in executables/unitTest can be used by any unit test, except by the module which is mocked. E.g. if bspIo unit test uses the mock of bspIo, then the unit test does not test the module itself. This already happens in the workspace, so I would like to add a checker for this to detect such unwanted mistakes.

# LIBS is a variable used below to not repeat the content several times
LIBS = libs
         - 3rdparty
         - bsp (lower layer, usually HW dependent)
         - bsw (upper layer, usually HW independent)
         - os (async, freeRtos, ...)

# the proposed workspace structure
LIBS
platforms
  - <plat 1>
    - LIBS
    - configs
  - <plat 2> ...
executables
  - <app 1>
    - LIBS
    - configs
    - platforms
      - <plat 1>
        - LIBS
        - configs
        - main
      - <plat 2> ...
  - <app 2> ...
  - unitTest
    - configs
    - mocks
    - platforms   <-- not needed today, but may be added in future
      - <plat 1>
        - configs
        - mocks
      - <plat 2> ...
tests
    - py-test
    - ...
cmake
doc
docker

What do you think?

[aschaal]

We briefly discussed that in public monthly meetings. I will bring this topic up again in early 2026.

The structure needs to be documented then in https://eclipse-openbsw.github.io/openbsw/sphinx_docs/doc/dev/index.html.