iox-#2128 Draft design for named segments

[gpalmer-latai]

Design document outlining the intended implementation for #2128

Pre-Review Checklist for the PR Author

1. [ ] Add a second reviewer for complex new features or larger refactorings
2. [x] Code follows the coding style of CONTRIBUTING.md
3. [x] Tests follow the best practice for testing
4. [x] Changelog updated in the unreleased section including API breaking changes
5. [x] Branch follows the naming format (iox-123-this-is-a-branch)
6. [x] Commits messages are according to this guideline
   • [x] Commit messages have the issue ID (iox-#123 commit text)
   • [x] Commit author matches Eclipse Contributor Agreement (and ECA is signed)
7. [x] Update the PR title
   • Follow the same conventions as for commit messages
   • Link to the relevant issue
8. [x] Relevant issues are linked
9. [x] Add sensible notes for the reviewer
10. [ ] All checks have passed (except task-list-completed)
11. [x] All touched (C/C++) source code files from iceoryx_hoofs are added to ./clang-tidy-diff-scans.txt
12. [ ] Assign PR to reviewer

Notes for Reviewer

Checklist for the PR Reviewer

• [ ] Commits are properly organized and messages are according to the guideline
• [ ] Code according to our coding style and naming conventions
• [ ] Unit tests have been written for new behavior
• [ ] Public API changes are documented via doxygen
• [ ] Copyright owner are updated in the changed files
• [ ] All touched (C/C++) source code files from iceoryx_hoofs have been added to ./clang-tidy-diff-scans.txt
• [ ] PR title describes the changes

Post-review Checklist for the PR Author

1. [ ] All open points are addressed and tracked via issues

References

• Closes TBD

[gpalmer-latai]

@elBoberido I'm back from vacation whenever you want to continue discussing this. If you'd like, we can add an agenda item to one of the next two developer meetups. Though I understand the focus may be on introducing Iceoryx2.

[gpalmer-latai]

I've made some changes to the design to remove the subscriber segment requesting feature and change how segments are requested to be mapped in the runtime. I'll go through again on Monday and see if I can clean up the design again some more.

[codecov[bot]]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests :white_check_mark:

Comparison is base (41ec0e7) 80.15% compared to head (085e8b6) 80.21%. Report is 26 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #2140      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   80.15%   80.21%   +0.05%     
==========================================
  Files         418      419       +1     
  Lines       16248    16276      +28     
  Branches     2251     2252       +1     
==========================================
+ Hits        13024    13055      +31     
+ Misses       2425     2424       -1     
+ Partials      799      797       -2     

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	80.00% <ø> (+0.05%)	:arrow_up:
unittests_timing	15.34% <ø> (+0.14%)	:arrow_up:

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

see 9 files with indirect coverage changes

[elBoberido]

I've made some changes to the design to remove the subscriber segment requesting feature and change how segments are requested to be mapped in the runtime. I'll go through again on Monday and see if I can clean up the design again some more.

I don't have time to look at it today and tomorrow might also be difficult. On Wednesday it shouldn't be a problem.