Add requirements justifications and upgrade to ReqStream 1.1.0

[Copilot]

Pull Request

Description

Implements requirements justifications following ReqStream 1.1.0 release. Each of the 30 requirements now documents its rationale, enabling better compliance auditing and stakeholder communication.

Key Changes:

• ReqStream 1.1.0 upgrade: Updated from 1.0.1 to enable justifications export
• Requirements documentation: Added justification fields to all requirements explaining why each exists
• YAML cleanup: Removed unnecessary double-quotes per ReqStream best practices
• Justifications PDF pipeline: Added generation of "BuildMark Requirements Justifications.pdf" to build workflow
• Documentation structure: Created docs/justifications/ with Pandoc configuration for PDF output
• Review feedback addressed: Updated VAL-001 justification to focus on user environment validation rather than internal tool verification

Example justification format:

requirements:
  - id: CLI-001
    title: The tool shall provide a command-line interface.
    justification: |
      A command-line interface is essential for BuildMark to integrate seamlessly into
      automated build pipelines, CI/CD workflows, and scripting environments. This enables
      developers and build systems to invoke the tool programmatically without requiring
      a graphical user interface.
    tests:
      - IntegrationTest_VersionFlag_OutputsVersion

Type of Change

• Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected)
• Documentation update
• Code quality improvement

Related Issues

Addresses feature request for requirements justifications support.

Pre-Submission Checklist

Before submitting this pull request, ensure you have completed the following:

Build and Test

• Code builds successfully: dotnet build --configuration Release
• All tests pass: dotnet test --configuration Release
• Code produces zero warnings

Code Quality

• Code formatting is correct: dotnet format --verify-no-changes
• New code has appropriate XML documentation comments
• Static analyzer warnings have been addressed

Quality Checks

Please run the following checks before submitting:

• Spell checker passes: cspell "**/*.{md,cs}"
• Markdown linter passes: markdownlint "**/*.md"
• YAML linter passes: yamllint '**/*.{yml,yaml}'

Testing

• Added unit tests for new functionality
• Updated existing tests if behavior changed
• All tests follow the AAA (Arrange, Act, Assert) pattern
• Test coverage is maintained or improved

Documentation

• Updated README.md (if applicable)
• Updated ARCHITECTURE.md (if applicable)
• Added code examples for new features (if applicable)
• Updated requirements.yaml (if applicable)

Additional Notes

The justifications markdown file is generated by ReqStream during build and excluded from version control via .gitignore. The PDF is published as a release artifact alongside existing documentation.

Justifications emphasize user-facing benefits and practical value, such as how self-validation allows users to verify tool functionality in their specific environments.

Original prompt

---

This section details on the original issue you should resolve

<issue_title>[Feature]: Requirements Justifications</issue_title>
<issue_description>### Problem Statement

The BuildMark requirements should have justifications.

Proposed Solution

The recently released ReqStream 1.1.0 release includes support for writing requirements justifications and publishing a requirements justification PDF. Please follow the updated documentation at https://github.com/demaconsulting/ReqStream with regards to:

• Requirements justifications
• Removing unnecessary double-quotes from requirement yaml files
• Add publishing of BuildMark Requirements Justifications.PDF file

Alternatives Considered

No response

Usage Examples

Benefits

Improved justification for requirements

Priority

High - Blocking my use case

Willingness to Contribute

Yes, I can submit a pull request

Additional Context

No response

Checklist

• I have searched existing issues to ensure this is not a duplicate
• I have provided a clear description of the feature
• I have explained why this feature would be useful</issue_description>

Comments on the Issue (you are @copilot in this section)

• Fixes [Feature]: Requirements Justifications #58

---

💬 We'd love your input! Share your thoughts on Copilot coding agent in our 2 minute survey.