Can there be a 1 to many relationship between design and implementation

[ayankuma]

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe. In our case, the design is translated to more than one number of implementations. Some of the implementations may be in the same of different files. However as per the current behaviour, the implementation inherits the same name as the design. Thus we cannot have more than one implementation names for the same design

"feat" --needs--> "req" --needs--> "dsn" --needs--> "impl" (terminates chain) |----> "utest" (terminates chain) '----> "itest" (terminates chain)

IOW, the following does not seem possible "dsn" <- 1 to many--> "impl1", "impl2", "impl3" and so on.

Describe the solution you'd like

[impl~impl1~1->dsn~desA~1]
[impl~impl2~1->dsn~desA~1]
[impl~impl3~1->dsn~desA~1]

Describe alternatives you've considered We don't want to have 3 dsn nodes in order to maintain 1-1 relationship.

Additional context Add any other context or screenshots about the feature request here.