Added support for requirement refinement

[poldi2015]

LinkedSpecificationItem is covered when covered by at least one SpecificationItem of the same type.

[sonarqubecloud]

Quality Gate failed

Failed conditions
56.2% Coverage on New Code (required ≥ 80%)

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud

[redcatbear]

To be frank, I don't think this is a good idea. If a requirement has a certain mandatory coverage artifact type, I find it misleading to allow covering it by a different type. Also, refinement can simply be done by covering the parent with multiple requirements on the current level.

Let us discuss the rationale behind this. As it stands, I reject the PR.

[poldi2015]

To be frank, I don't think this is a good idea. If a requirement has a certain mandatory coverage artifact type, I find it misleading to allow covering it by a different type. Also, refinement can simply be done by covering the parent with multiple requirements on the current level.

Let us discuss the rationale behind this. As it stands, I reject the PR.

Yes let's discuss. Most likely it needs a bit more background. This is in fact one of the topics that I want to discuss with you.

What do you mean with "refinement can simply be done by covering the parent with multiple requirements on the current level.".

What I actually need is more or less: If have a requirement of type "req" withneeds is req or (design and test). We currently use that a lot in our architecture (at least > 500 requirements) as we have two levels of architects: system and team architects. In some cases the team architects decide to refine the system level requirements, in most cases not.