rename relations for Codebeamer compatibility

[RSingh1511]

📌 Description

🚨 Impact Analysis

• This change does not violate any tool requirements and is covered by existing tool requirements
• This change does not violate any design decisions
• Otherwise I have created a ticket for new tool qualification

✅ Checklist

• Added/updated documentation for new or changed features
• Added/updated tests to cover the changes
• Followed project coding standards and guidelines

[github-actions]

License Check Results

🚀 The license check job ran with the Bazel command:

bazel run --lockfile_mode=error //src:license-check

Status: ⚠️ Needs Review

Click to expand output

[License Check Output]
2026/03/24 09:11:05 Downloading https://releases.bazel.build/8.3.0/release/bazel-8.3.0-linux-x86_64...
Extracting Bazel installation...
Starting local Bazel server (8.3.0) and connecting to it...
INFO: Invocation ID: e83df717-2f90-48a2-8c07-0994f84f16bf
Computing main repo mapping: 
Computing main repo mapping: 
Computing main repo mapping: 
Loading: 
Loading: 0 packages loaded
Loading: 0 packages loaded
Loading: 0 packages loaded
    currently loading: src
Loading: 0 packages loaded
    currently loading: src
Analyzing: target //src:license-check (1 packages loaded)
Analyzing: target //src:license-check (1 packages loaded, 0 targets configured)
Analyzing: target //src:license-check (1 packages loaded, 0 targets configured)

Analyzing: target //src:license-check (66 packages loaded, 9 targets configured)

Analyzing: target //src:license-check (68 packages loaded, 9 targets configured)

Analyzing: target //src:license-check (70 packages loaded, 9 targets configured)

Analyzing: target //src:license-check (128 packages loaded, 996 targets configured)

Analyzing: target //src:license-check (132 packages loaded, 2517 targets configured)

Analyzing: target //src:license-check (135 packages loaded, 2527 targets configured)

Analyzing: target //src:license-check (140 packages loaded, 2576 targets configured)

Analyzing: target //src:license-check (140 packages loaded, 2576 targets configured)

Analyzing: target //src:license-check (141 packages loaded, 2577 targets configured)

Analyzing: target //src:license-check (144 packages loaded, 4589 targets configured)

INFO: Analyzed target //src:license-check (145 packages loaded, 4715 targets configured).
[12 / 16] JavaToolchainCompileClasses external/rules_java+/toolchains/platformclasspath_classes; 0s disk-cache, processwrapper-sandbox ... (2 actions running)
[14 / 16] JavaToolchainCompileBootClasspath external/rules_java+/toolchains/platformclasspath.jar; 0s disk-cache, processwrapper-sandbox
INFO: Found 1 target...
Target //src:license.check.license_check up-to-date:
  bazel-bin/src/license.check.license_check
  bazel-bin/src/license.check.license_check.jar
INFO: Elapsed time: 23.795s, Critical Path: 2.51s
INFO: 16 processes: 12 internal, 3 processwrapper-sandbox, 1 worker.
INFO: Build completed successfully, 16 total actions
INFO: Running command line: bazel-bin/src/license.check.license_check src/formatted.txt <args omitted>
usage: org.eclipse.dash.licenses.cli.Main [-batch <int>] [-cd <url>]
       [-confidence <int>] [-ef <url>] [-excludeSources <sources>] [-help] [-lic
       <url>] [-project <shortname>] [-repo <url>] [-review] [-summary <file>]
       [-timeout <seconds>] [-token <token>]

[masc2023]

Not sure why you want to change it, but before you can change something, you need to apply change request, as this is defined here
https://eclipse-score.github.io/process_description/main/general_concepts/score_building_blocks_concept.html#building-blocks-meta-model

[MaximilianSoerenPollak]

We can't just change something big like that.

A lot of the documentations are already build with these namings in mind, and now changing them without any reasoning or agreeing inside S-CORE that this needs to happen does not seem smart nor ideal to me.

As @masc2023 said above, if this truly is a change needed, please make sure you discuss it in the correct meetings inside S-CORE and make a change request.

As it's still on draft I won't close this. But as is currently this will not be considered.

[aschemmel-tech]

This change is related to eclipse-score/process_description#418 - which exists and is approved by the process_community since some time, but never got the capacity to do.