Priorities and contents of releases

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Object Oriented Analysis And Design-IT0207 iiI Semester
Advertisements

The System and Software Development Process Instructor: Dr. Hany H. Ammar Dept. of Computer Science and Electrical Engineering, WVU.
[Title of meeting] [Name of sponsor] [Date] For guidance on working with PowerPoint and reformatting slides, click on Help, then Microsoft PowerPoint Help,
18 June 2010 Upgrading Your Geant4 Release J. Perl 1 Upgrading Your Geant4 Release Joseph Perl, SLAC.
6 November 2009 Upgrading Your Geant4 Release J. Perl 1 Upgrading Your Geant4 Release Joseph Perl, SLAC Geant4 v9.2p02.
14 January 2011 Upgrading Your Geant4 Release J. Perl 1 Upgrading Your Geant4 Release Joseph Perl, SLAC.
3 Dec 2003Market Operations Standing Committee1 Market Rule and Change Management Consultation Process John MacKenzie / Darren Finkbeiner / Ella Kokotsis,
Project Management Development & developers
System Planning- Preliminary investigation
1 Software Development Configuration management. \ 2 Software Configuration  Items that comprise all information produced as part of the software development.
Usability Issues Documentation J. Apostolakis for Geant4 16 January 2009.
Development of Management Information System for the Forestry Sector in Viet Nam F O R M I S II Implementation of PSC’s conclusion during the 2 nd meeting.
American Community Survey ACS Content Review Webinar State Data Centers and Census Information Centers James Treat, ACSO Division Chief December 4, 2013.
IEEE /r3 Submission September 2008 John Notor, Cadence Design Systems, Inc.Slide 1 IEEE IMT-Advanced Review Process Date:
GOVERNOR’S EARLY CHILDHOOD ADVISORY COUNCIL (ECAC) September 9, 2014.
LCG Generator Meeting, December 11 th 2003 Introduction to the LCG Generator Monthly Meeting.
Southend Together Secretariat 21 st February Developing Southend Together’s Sustainable Community Strategy
Recall The Team Skills 1. Analyzing the Problem (with 5 steps) 2. Understanding User and Stakeholder Needs 3. Defining the System A Use Case Primer Organizing.
Users contributions, documentation J. Apostolakis.
Ocean Observatories Initiative R2.0 Beta Test Field Report January 24, ION R2.0 Beta Test 2013-Jan-24 Field Report Susanne Jul, Carolanne Fisher,
Strategic Planning The Big Picture Region 3 ESA September 30, 2004.
1 Object-Oriented Analysis and Design with the Unified Process Figure 13-1 Implementation discipline activities.
An Agile Requirements Approach 1. Step 1: Get Organized  Meet with your team and agree on the basic software processes you will employ.  Decide how.
IEEE /r5 Submission November 2008 John Notor, Cadence Design Systems, Inc.Slide 1 IEEE IMT-Advanced Review Process Date:
CCS Information and Support Center Introduction. What is the information center for? Not only does our web-based.
Chapter 25 – Configuration Management 1Chapter 25 Configuration management.
SLAs with Software Provider. Scope “…declare the rights and responsibilities between EGI.eu and the Software Provider for a particular component.” Which.
Gemserv1 Release Management Enduring Releases. Release Management  SEC defines Release Management as the process adopted for planning, scheduling and.
TK2023 Object-Oriented Software Engineering
Open source development model and methodologies.
COMET Working Group Progress Report 11/13/03
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 2017 AMENDMENT PROCESS and DOCKET
2011 Prioritization Update to Market Subcommittees
Introductory Remarks and Meeting Goals
CIIMS Proposal for TOP-003 Approach
Savannah to Jira Migration
Releases and developments
How to Upgrade Your Geant4 Release
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 2017 AMENDMENT PROCESS and DOCKET
Chapter 4 Systems Planning and Selection
The Features of a Product or System
End of Year Performance Review Meetings and objective setting for 2018/19 This briefing pack is designed to be used by line managers to brief their teams.
Change Assurance Dashboard
Amendment Invoice Task Force Progress Report
SPR&I Regional Training
Amendment Invoice Task Force Progress Report
G.Cosmo - URD improvements Gabriele Cosmo (CERN/IT-API)
Amendment Invoice Task Force Progress Report
Item 6.1 COICOP revision Conclusions: The Working Group participants generally agreed with the proposed new structure for COICOP with some reservations.
NERC Reliability Standards Development Plan
IEEE IMT-Advanced Review Process
Chapter 8 Software Evolution.
Drafting Coordinator Report
FY18 Water Use Data and Research Program Q & A Session
IEEE IMT-Advanced Review Process
IEEE IMT-Advanced Review Process
Amendment Invoice Task Force Progress Report
Comments on IMT-Advanced Review Process
SNS College of Engineering Coimbatore
APT – Planning the Next Phase & Resourcing Risk 2 Nov
Amendment Invoice Task Force Progress Report
NERC Reliability Standards Development Plan
TAG Agenda – April 6th 2006 Minutes from last TAG meeting – 13.45
Release definition & scheduling
Beta releases and Product Management
Geant4 Documentation Geant4 Workshop 4 October 2002 Dennis Wright
IEEE IMT-Advanced Review Process
User Support, User Requirements
Web Presentation Improvement
Proposal on TSC policy for ONAP release Maintenance
Presentation transcript:

Priorities and contents of releases and the TSB decision process J. Apostolakis Version 0.3 Geant4 Delta Review, October 2002

Geant4 Delta Review, October 2002 Outline Work plan Release planning Scheduled releases Minor releases Major releases Other releases Patches Unscheduled minor releases Recommendation 3.3: We recommend that the GEANT4 Collaboration clearly define the (different) areas of responsibilities and physics coverage of the two EM groups. The CB should ensure that the relation between the two groups remain that of healthy competition and productive interaction. Recommendation 4.1: We recommend a release schedule planned around a set of corrections and improvements. Both the schedule and the planned features should be readily accessible to all users and developers.   Recommendation 4.2: We recommend the adoption of more frequent, though not necessarily fully tested, “beta” releases that address important blocking problems. They should be available to all users. These “beta” releases are in addition to having a stable and working version of the program at any time, with a documentation of all known bugs or deficiencies in that particular version. Recommendation 4.3: We recommend defining and managing the complete product tree, including documentation as well as the code, as part of a release. If the documentation is not ready, the release cannot be deemed to be ready. Recommendation 4.4: URD’s are an integral part of the documentation and product trees. A coherent set covering all of GEANT4 must be finished and put in place expeditiously. Geant4 Delta Review, October 2002

Geant4 Delta Review, October 2002 2001 Review recommendation 4.1 We recommend a release schedule planned around a set of corrections and improvements. Both the schedule and the planned features should be readily accessible to all users and developers. Geant4 Delta Review, October 2002

General considerations on releases Regular releases To include continuing development(s) Effort for scheduled releases 5 week release cycle includes Tiered category deadlines (3 groups) Quality assurance (memory leak) Investigation and solution of open problems Need for quick response of many people leads to the necessity of scheduling release cycles. Experience has shown that at most two scheduled releases can be achieved each year. Geant4 Delta Review, October 2002

‘Feature’ vs. ‘calendar’ releases Content based releases Advantages Well defined end product User clarity Disadvantages Difficulty in predicting Potential for large date slippage Calendar based releases Disadvantages Unclear end product Potential user confusion Advantages Scheduling of developers’ availability Scheduling of users. Neither has appeared fully satisfactory for our collaboration. Geant4 Delta Review, October 2002

Geant4 Delta Review, October 2002 Solution adopted Current compromise Proposed developments for releases agreed in first quarter of year After review of experiment/client requirements And proposal of WG development goals Release plan is reviewed by TSB in fall to assess realised risks to revise, if necessary, the proposed content and/or date of a release. Geant4 Delta Review, October 2002

Geant4 Delta Review, October 2002 Release 4.0 (released December 2001) Work plan 2001 (link) Set scheduled content of 4.0 in 1st quarter 2001 Conditional addition of cuts/material On 27th September 2001 a goal for 4.0, if possible, or 4.1 Items of concern Oct/Nov 2001: Potential disruption due to addition of new functionality (cuts/material) Delay in a hadronic model TSB meeting 13th Nov 2001 Decision to proceed with release in Dec 2001 with cuts per material and available models due to request of experiment(s) Release (release notes) included cuts/material Note: a patch (#1) was required for a fix related to the one of the ‘major’ added kernel features (reference counted touchables). Geant4 Delta Review, October 2002

Geant4 Delta Review, October 2002 Release 5.0 Work plan (TSB 11th April 2002) Announcement of scheduled features of Geant4 5.0 At the time of the release of Geant4 4.1 In the download web page and since also on the top Geant4 web page Fall review: TSB 4th October 2002 Current leading risk: Cuts/region development New requests Comparable versions with cuts/material & cuts/region (ATLAS) Further maintenance of cuts/material (ESA) Draft plan created Confirmed features of Geant4 5.0 to be announced soon. Geant4 Delta Review, October 2002

Geant4 Delta Review, October 2002 Refinements in 2001/2 Documentation released with source, data As of Geant4 4.0, December 2001 ‘Beta’ releases for public Available on signup to mailing list Subscribers 4th October 2002 number 30. First one made Aug 2002 Development monthly-tag version (usual case) Current schedule: every two months possible each month, will see feedback. Geant4 Delta Review, October 2002

First thoughts on possible future improvements Better presentation of scheduled features Earlier and wider More communication of improvements Short ‘briefings’ on the status of Geant4 at each release Concentrating on new features User discussion session(s) one-two months later To obtain user feedback Better estimated development plans Challenging due to diversity, distribution of collaboration Geant4 Delta Review, October 2002