Project requirements

The Wiki now includes a bounded, project-wide HDRFP snapshot. Jira issues are authoritative evidence for reported problems, requested features/tasks and workflow state, but not every issue is an approved long-lived requirement. Implementation-derived candidates remain distinct from Jira-backed direction.

Stable project responsibility candidates

IDRequirement candidateEvidence classOwnersValidation
FPS-REQ-001Fingerprint lifecycle: Support device initialization, capture, enrollment, identification/verification, template management and cancellation.Implementation + recurring Jira problem evidenceWBF + niseCoreWBF/niseCore tests plus customer scenarios
FPS-REQ-002Windows integration: Expose WBF/WBDI behavior and manage power, wake, Modern Standby and power-button transitions.Implementation + Jira bug evidenceWBF wrapper + niseCoreVirtual/unit plus device/OS power tests
FPS-REQ-003Customer composition: Build only compatible customer_project and source-ref combinations defined by customers.json.Delivery configuration + Jira automation tasksdriver-build + niseCore + WBF + includeMatrix checks and exact customer builds
FPS-REQ-004Firmware compatibility: Maintain the host side of command IDs/payloads/status semantics, update orchestration, IOTA and version/product compatibility while firmware implementation remains external.Driver implementation + user-approved scope + Jira boundary issuesWBF + niseCore + include; firmware team externalHost tests plus joint device/firmware integration
FPS-REQ-005Targeted delivery: Support configured X64 and ARM64 targets through explicit EWDK/build inputs.Delivery configurationdriver-build + WBF + niseCoreCustomer build evidence
FPS-REQ-006Secure delivery: Validate and sign release packages without exposing credentials.Workflow-enforceddriver-buildSigned artifact and workflow result
FPS-REQ-007Source-grounded testing: Resolve target branch variants, extract current production functions and report build/run outcomes.Implementation + Jira test tasksutestutest workflow artifacts
FPS-REQ-008Traceability: Retain exact source refs/SHAs and connect Jira intent/problem → commit/PR solution → Action validation without collapsing the evidence classes.Wiki/delivery policyallCheckpoint, links and evidence ledger
FPS-REQ-009Adapter migration: Establish observable-behavior parity evidence before replacing C++ WBF adapter/policy-service behavior with Rust components.Jira features HDRFP-12243/12256 + implementationWBF + utest + driver-buildC++/Rust integration and replay evidence; customer build/runtime tests
FPS-REQ-010Engineering feedback: Apply rule-based IOTA, code-format/static checks, daily-build failure notification and quality automation as independently observable controls.Jira tasks/features HDRFP-12216/12258/12267/12268/12269driver-build + source repos + utestAction run/job evidence with failures/skips explicit

Jira-backed current direction

JiraType/stateIntended problem or workCurrent evidence assessment
HDRFP-12268New PNP Request / In ProgressRefine daily build parameters, failure notifications and reusable actions.Commits in three repos, three merged PRs and successful builds; still not accepted/closed.
HDRFP-12258DevOps / OpenExpand IOTA rule checking to current projects.Merged changes and mixed build history; current Open state means coverage is not assumed complete.
HDRFP-12243New Feature / In ProgressFinalize Rust project 864 integration.Rust branch/build evidence exists; direct per-commit Jira linkage is incomplete.
HDRFP-12256New Feature / In ProgressCaptured-behavior replay for C++/Rust parity.ETW/replay code and Actions are semantically aligned; no Jira-linked PR/build at observation.
HDRFP-12269New PNP Request / OpenDefine automatic quality verification scope and adoption.Planning only; no implementation is claimed.

See current project direction and Jira/Git/Actions traceability.

Requirement completeness gap

The one-month Jira snapshot explains current problems and work direction, but does not replace complete historical product requirements or customer acceptance criteria. Older epics, customer specifications and firmware-team contracts still need explicit authoritative sources where they control behavior.