T Project Review X-tremeIT PP Iteration

T Project Review X-TremeIT Valeria, Konstantin, Roman, Olesia, Vladislav, Seppo, Aleksandr 2 Agenda  Project status (13 min)  Achieving the goals of the iteration  Realization of tasks  Working hours  Quality control  Risks  Used work practices (10 min)  Recommended work practices  Personal SE assignments  Results of the iteration (10 min)  Project Plan  Requirements document  Progress report  Plan for the next iteration (7 min)  Goals, deliverables, documents, risks  Planned tasks  Schedule  Questions, comments? (~ 5 min)

T Project Review X-TremeIT Valeria, Konstantin, Roman, Olesia, Vladislav, Seppo, Aleksandr 3 Agenda  Project status (13 min)  Achieving the goals of the iteration  Realization of tasks  Working hours  Quality control  Risks  Used work practices (10 min)  Recommended work practices  Personal SE assignments  Results of the iteration (10 min)  Project Plan  Requirements document  Progress report  Plan for the next iteration (7 min)  Goals, deliverables, documents, risks  Planned tasks  Schedule  Questions, comments? (~5 min)

T Project Review X-TremeIT Valeria, Konstantin, Roman, Olesia, Vladislav, Seppo, Aleksandr 4 Status of planned goals of the iteration  Goal 1: Write PP phase documentation  OK: the documentation delivered  Goal 2: Select and adapt work practices to be used in the project  OK: all planned for the PP iteration practices were applied to the project process successfully  Risk management practices were developed rather late because of the course schedule, but will be applied in the next iterations  Goal 3: Make the contract with the customer  OK: the contract was signed , both parties are satisfied with all contact clauses.  Goal 4: Requirements elicitation  OK: Requirements were discussed and analyzed with customer.  Goal 5: Specification of most important use cases, use case model, user group  OK: requirements ranking is done with customer, use cases are presented in the requirements document

T Project Review X-TremeIT Valeria, Konstantin, Roman, Olesia, Vladislav, Seppo, Aleksandr 5 Status of planned deliverables of the iteration  Project Plan  OK: document with all required chapters is delivered  To be updated in the next iterations  Requirements document  OK: document with all required chapters is delivered  TODO: ratify the requirements document with customer, DL , Responsible Konstantin Moroz  Progress Report  OK: delivered as a slide set according to the course instructions

T Project Review X-TremeIT Valeria, Konstantin, Roman, Olesia, Vladislav, Seppo, Aleksandr 6 Realization of the tasks  Deviations:  Lectures  not all team members always was able to attend lectures  3 hours per lecture were reserved, but lectures took less time  Studying technology (XML, UML, Bugzilla, Java)  The largest discrepancy  When panned did not realized that it is too early to study technology in PP phase, because final decision about technologies will be done in the I1 phase  Customer meetings  Two customer meetings were cancelled  Adopt tool CVS  It turned out that some team member already knows the CVS  Personal SE practice  More time to be spent in the I1 iteration  Double counting: As a personal SE practice Seppo choose version control, hours were submitted as ‘Adopt tool CVS’ task  Start and organize the project  Small tasks like ‘considering documentation options’, ‘studying course documentation’ were not planned in the task, but was reported to this category.  Project review and preparation  This task was reserved for all group members, but the actual preparation to be done on the group meeting ( ) before project review  No unplanned work!

T Project Review X-TremeIT Valeria, Konstantin, Roman, Olesia, Vladislav, Seppo, Aleksandr 7 Working hours by person  One reason for deviations is that studying technology tasks were not realized, will be realized in the next iteration  Not all hours were reported by the time of writing progress report  No extra time for writing progress report were given (maybe not bad practice for next iterations)  The estimated hours for some tasks were decreased after we realized that PP phase is taking too much time RealPlanDiff Valeria 62, ,9 Aleksandr 55,7565-9,25 Vladislav 52,5064,43-11,93 Konstantin 53,7564,43-10,68 Olesia 41,4564,43-22,98 Roman 49,7064,43-14,73 Seppo 45,7564,43-18,68 Total Realized hours in this iterationPlan in the beginning of this iteration PP Subtot I1I2I3DETotal Valeria 62 51, Aleksandr 56 45, Vladislav 53 45, Konstantin 54 48, Olesia 41 45, Roman 50 45, Seppo 46 45, Total ,

T Project Review X-TremeIT Valeria, Konstantin, Roman, Olesia, Vladislav, Seppo, Aleksandr 8 Quality control  Two people were assigned to one piece of work: one person is responsible for writing document chapter, and another person is responsible for reviewing  One person was responsible for final formatting  Project manager reviewed all documents before submitting

T Project Review X-TremeIT Valeria, Konstantin, Roman, Olesia, Vladislav, Seppo, Aleksandr 9 Risks  Risk management plan was written as part of the project plan  Risks identification: brain storming meeting, 25 risks identified  Risk analysis: based on the Jyrki Kontio method ‘Riskit’  Risk scenarios diagrams  No one risk is materialized yet*  New risks to be reported on the group meetings  Old risks tracking (level of the risks evaluation form)  * One more risk should be added to the risk management plan: technological risk (problems with software)

T Project Review X-TremeIT Valeria, Konstantin, Roman, Olesia, Vladislav, Seppo, Aleksandr 10 Agenda  Project status (13 min)  Achieving the goals of the iteration  Realization of tasks  Working hours  Quality control  Risks  Used work practices (10 min)  Recommended work practices  Personal SE assignments  Results of the iteration (10 min)  Project Plan  Requirements document  Progress report  Plan for the next iteration (7 min)  Goals, deliverables, documents, risks  Planned tasks  Schedule  Questions, comments? (~ 5 min)

T Project Review X-TremeIT Valeria, Konstantin, Roman, Olesia, Vladislav, Seppo, Aleksandr 11 Work practices  Iteration planning  Detailed plan for I1 iteration is described in the project plan. Changes are still possible  Risk management (described in the previous slide)  Time reporting  Hours were reported in regular basis (though not from the beginning of the phase – we needed time to learn Trapoli and create tasks)  Sometimes reported hours disappeared from the Trapoli, other bugs.  Other problems (impossible to allocate group of people to one task, use ALL)  Documenting and document delivery  Project plan, requirements document and progress report are submitted via ‘delivery tool’ and delivered to customer  Requirements prioritization  Ranking of requirements were discussed with customer and presented in the requirements document  Use cases  About 20 use cases are presented in the requirements document  Use case diagram  Version control  CVS was installed  CVS instructions document  CVS was used for documentation  Seams to be reliable and easy to adopt tool  Test approach is described in the project plan  Project progress tracking and control  Tasks tracking and control  Internal deadlines  Trapoli submitted hours control  Project report is delivered

T Project Review X-TremeIT Valeria, Konstantin, Roman, Olesia, Vladislav, Seppo, Aleksandr 12 Personal SE assignments PracticeResponsibleUsage Requirements elicitation and analysisKonstantin MorozI1-I3 Usability testsRoman SirokovI2-DE Architectural designVladislav JumppanenI1-I3 Pair ProgrammingAleksandr HuhtonenI1-DE Configuration managementSeppo EnarviI1-DE Static methodsOlesja HuopolainenI1-DE Project progress tracking and controlValeria ZimenkovaPP-DE

T Project Review X-TremeIT Valeria, Konstantin, Roman, Olesia, Vladislav, Seppo, Aleksandr 13 Agenda  Project status (13 min)  Achieving the goals of the iteration  Realization of tasks  Working hours  Quality control  Risks  Used work practices (10 min)  Recommended work practices  Personal SE assignments  Results of the iteration (10 min)  Project Plan  Requirements document  Progress report  Plan for the next iteration (7 min)  Goals, deliverables, documents, risks  Planned tasks  Schedule  Questions, comments? (~ 5 min)

T Project Review X-TremeIT Valeria, Konstantin, Roman, Olesia, Vladislav, Seppo, Aleksandr 14 Project plan  Background of the project  Project organization  Project goals  Project resources  Project practices and tools  Iterations  Risk management plan

T Project Review X-TremeIT Valeria, Konstantin, Roman, Olesia, Vladislav, Seppo, Aleksandr 15 Requirements document  Business goals of the system  Main domain concepts of the system  System overview  User groups  User requirements  Functionality of the system  Property requirements  Quality requirements  Non-functional requirements  System constraints

T Project Review X-TremeIT Valeria, Konstantin, Roman, Olesia, Vladislav, Seppo, Aleksandr 16 Agenda  Project status (13 min)  Achieving the goals of the iteration  Realization of tasks  Working hours  Quality control  Risks  Used work practices (10 min)  Recommended work practices  Personal SE assignments  Results of the iteration (10 min)  Project Plan  Requirements document  Progress report  Plan for the next iteration (7 min)  Goals, deliverables, documents, risks  Planned tasks  Schedule  Questions, comments? (~ 5 min)

T Project Review X-TremeIT Valeria, Konstantin, Roman, Olesia, Vladislav, Seppo, Aleksandr 17 Plan for the next iteration  Goals  Ratification of the requirements  Designing core architecture of the system  Choosing technologies to use  Designing most important modules & use cases  Writing architectural specifications  Implementing most important modules and use cases on general level  Testing the baseline architecture of the system  Updating test approach and write test cases  Implementing testing  Reviews  Inspections  Deliverables  Implemented use cases/core architectural parts:  Case UC-01: Creating new process diagram  Case UC-02: Add new object  Case UC-03: Add dependency between 2 objects To be continued …

T Project Review X-TremeIT Valeria, Konstantin, Roman, Olesia, Vladislav, Seppo, Aleksandr 18 Plan for the next iteration (continued )  Documents:  updated project plan  updated requirements document  tech. specification on a general level  test cases  Priorities between goals  High  Design core architecture  Implement most important modules  Risks  Test plan fails  Wrong architectural design  Lack of experience  Underestimated resources for project task  Project is late  Requirements changed

T Project Review X-TremeIT Valeria, Konstantin, Roman, Olesia, Vladislav, Seppo, Aleksandr 19 Planned tasks

T Project Review X-TremeIT Valeria, Konstantin, Roman, Olesia, Vladislav, Seppo, Aleksandr 20 Schedule (customer meetings to be added) DateDescriptionResponsible person iDL: Requirements ratificationKonstantin Group meeting iDL: Architecture Design (deliver document to customer and CVS)Vladislav (14.00)Group meeting /Architecture design inspection (12.00)?Group meeting (might be cancelled) (16.30)?Customer meeting Mentor meeting iDL: ImplementationAleksandr (16.00)Group meeting / Inspection of the code iDL : Testing and delivering test report DL: I1 documentation delivery Project review

T Project Review X-TremeIT Valeria, Konstantin, Roman, Olesia, Vladislav, Seppo, Aleksandr 21 Thank you! Questions, comments?