T-76.115 Project Review

T-76.115 Project Review

eGoI2 Iteration

11.2.2004

2

T-76.115 Project ReviewT-76.115 Project Review

Agenda

Project status (15 min) achieving the goals of the iteration project metrics

Used work practices (5 min) Completed work (10 min)

demo Plans for the next iteration (5 min) Open discussion (10 min)

3


Status of planned goals of the iteration

GOAL 1 Working prototype of the system – OK!

GOAL 2 Interview part of the esurvey system – OK!

GOAL 3 User Interface heuristic evaluation – OK!

GOAL 4 Automated unit tests – NOT OK! Automated unit tests are dropped because of huge

amount of work demanded and little amount of advantages gained from tests. Testing is decided to be implemented differently

4


Realization of the tasks

Lot of meetings Internal and Customer. Although lot of time were spend benefits were also substantial

WEB interface also took a lot of time but very satisfactory product was build.

DS:Write/update tech. specs 6,50 20,00 -13.5

GE:Meetings (customer) 24.00 35,00 -11,00

GE:Meetings (internal) 55.00 38,00 17,00

GE:Meetings (status/mentor) 7.00 14,00 -7,00

IM:GUI 32.50 20,00 12,50

IM:update project plan 32,50 15,00 -9.5

IM:Use Case 1 13.50 15,00 -1.5

IM:Use Case 2 54.50 15,00 39,5

IM:Use Case 3 24.00 15,00 9,00

IM:Use Case 4 12,50 15,00 -2.5

IM:Use Case 6 34.50 25,00 9,50

IM:Use Case 7 38.50 25,00 13,50

IM:Use Case 8 11.00 25,00 -14,00

IM:Use Case 9 21.00 20,00 1,00

PM:Other project management 22.50 20,00 2,50

PM:Personal SE practice 20.00 25,00 -5,00

PM:Plan the next iteration 6.00 10,00 -4,00

PM:Write progress report 4.00 5,00 -1,00

TE: Module Testing 8,50 15,00 -6.5

TE:Execute and report tests 20.00 20,00 0,00

TE:Prepare testing 9.00 15,00 -6,00

5


Working hours

Over 75% of project is done Only 300 hours left little over 1000 hours used

during the PP+I1+I2

Everybody has done something during I2

Differencies between persons caused by different field knowledge

PP + I1 + I2

I3

DE

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

aha

hjt

jjk

jka

lhe

sle

sll

Series1

6


Quality metrics

Team is now familiar with BugZilla Most of the bugs were found outside ”disciplined” testing

I1 I2 I3 DE TotalReported 3 20 23Closed 1 10 11Open 2 10 12

Bug metrics

Blockers Critical Major Minor Trivial TotalTotal open 0 0 5 5 2 12This iteration reported

0 0 2 5 3 10

7


Quality assessment

Feedback from the Quality Department The tests covered all the requirements that were set for

this iteration Overall state of the components is good The group is now familiar with Bugzilla Additional bug reporting tools used: TODO-lists, email,

Messenger, ICQ...

Overall quality is good

Functional area Coverage Quality Comments

Web UI 3 Re-tested in I2 phase, works fine now

Questionnaire creation

3 Apart from minor enhancements it is ready

Screening with WAP 2 Good progress, but still not enough testing made

Legend

Coverage:

0 = nothing

1 = we looked at it

2 = we checked all functions

3 = it’s tested

Quality:

= quality is good

= not sure

= quality is bad

8


Peer testing

Peer group (Muuntaja) has been contacted and schedule has been negotiated

Peer testing will be performed on week 10, covering: questionnaire creation & upload web UI functionalities WAP interviewing web interviewing

8 man-hours of work by peer group is allocated for us

9


Software size (Java)

We chose to use Number of Statements, since it gives a better view of the software

Configuration work, web resources, excel macros etc not included here VM pages are also not included (both web and wap)

PP I1 I2 I3 DELines of Code in Methods (LOCm) 0 368 722Number of statements (NOS) 0 261 572Number of Lines 0 2859 6838

10


Risks

Risk management is done by three the members of the group attending risk management module

Following conclusions have been made during the I2-iteration Some minor setbacks in technology sector Time is luxury that we don’t have. Good risk management has been efficent and risk factors have decreased

11


Work practices

The group has used all the mandatory practices demanded by the course Version control system has worked well via eclipse. Time reporting has been working well. Difficult to report for progress report

beacuse not all the hours are done when progress report has to be handed in. Long period of time has also caused some hours to be forgotten

Bugzilla has been used to report bugs. The amount of use has been increased from I1 period. All founded bugs are not yet reported through bugzilla but use has been increases

Members have been studying and documenting their own personal practices GUI has been tested by end users Some advantage has been gained through more efficent internal

communicating The use of Heuristic Evalution practice is shortly briefed by Sampo

During the next iteration Final touch to personal assigments

12


Results of the iteration

Working implementation of use cases 6.1-6.9 ( not 6.5 demo):

New deliverables for the iteration were User guides torsos (three different versions)

13


User Guide wap

On-going projects can be browsed When logged in ongoing projects will show in the list Choose the right project and open link Brief summary of project is shown and link to start interviewing is also

shown On-going projects can be monitored

The quotas that need to filled and brief description of those can be read form start page of the project

Choose the quota to see it's desctription The quota shows the results in format 1/30(on is founded and

interviewed, the total amount of quota is 30) Interview of certain project can be delivered

If interview link is choosed interview will start Pressing back button will return you to earlier quoestion and empty

the result of the question When finished the phone will print results Abort button will abort interview session After interview updated quotas will be shown

14


Test Documentation

Test planning Started in PP phase Testing practices and responsibilities are now planned and documented

Test cases Test cases are grouped into test suites after use cases in addition to just verifying that functionalities are implemented, defects are

looked for by testing limits for input values Test cases (total 16 in this iteration) were documented and run, see test

specification for details Test specification = test log

Test report concludes the results of testing

QA in the future Heavy system testing to be done by eGo, customer and peer group automate the tests

15


Plan for the next iteration

Goals Pilot case (after/before winter holidays) Working product Data export

Deliverables Fully operational product Installing instructions User guide wep User guide wap List of cell phones that work with the

product

DS:Write/update tech. specs 10 13.2.2004 18.3.2004

GE:Meetings (customer) 21 13.2.2004 18.3.2004

GE:Meetings (internal) 14 13.2.2004 18.3.2004

GE:Meetings (status/mentor) 7 13.2.2004 18.3.2004

IM: Bug fixing 17 13.2.2004 18.3.2004

IM:Use Case 2 8 13.2.2004 29.2.2004

IM:Use Case 6 10 13.2.2004 29.2.2004

IM:Use Case 8 15 13.2.2004 29.2.2004

IM:Use Case 9 10 13.2.2004 29.2.2004

IM:Write user guides 10 13.2.2004 18.3.2004

PM:Other project management 15 13.2.2004 18.3.2004

PM:Personal SE practice 14 13.2.2004 18.3.2004

PM:Plan the next iteration 5 14.3.2004 18.3.2004

PM:Project review and preparation

14 14.3.2004 18.3.2004

PM:Write progress report 6 14.3.2004 18.3.2004

TE:Execute and report peer tests 8 1.3.2004 8.3.2004

TE:Execute and report tests 15 13.2.2004 18.3.2004

T-76.115 Project Review

Documents

Transcript of T-76.115 Project Review