Quality Analysis Report Quality Assurance Activities Summary /2009 IPC ISEC-DEIS

Summary Trinity Quality Roadmap – Quality Vision – Quality Actions – Quality Metrics Quality Assurance Activities Change Control Activities Network Knowledge Survey Lessons Learned Conclusions

3 Master Plan Trinity

Quality Vision Quality Roadmap Qualitative Software is develped right the first time as much as possible Quantitative User Satisfaction Conformance to correct requirements Internal Value

Quality Actions Quality Roadmap Walkthrough Activities Review Activities Inspection Activities Templates; Guidelines Test Campaign Metrics

Quality Metrics Quality Roadmap  Number of quality activities conducted  Number of changes to project schedule and milestones  Number of tests by requirement  Number of tests failed and passed  Change Request Impact  Network Knowledge  Lessons Learned  Self Evaluation

Quality Assurance Activities Quality Analysis Report /2009 IPC ISEC-DEIS

QAA Coverage Quality Assurance Activities DocumentQuality ActivityNotes RAN.A.Due to its specificity it was included in the global results PIwalkthrough- SDPreviewAfter a review, it was decided by the author to conduce a walkthrough SDPwalkthrough- PARN.A. This document will be closed after QAR. So, it was excluded from the metrics collects. Although, it will be under walkthrough QAPwalkthroughWalkthrough, but was conduced before the processes and the document it self are agreed. QAPreview QARN.A. It refers to this document. Because this document refers to the metrics it self, it was excluded from statistics and analysis. Although, it will be under walkthrough CCPreview- CSDwalkthrough- UIPwalkthrough- URreview- SRSinspection-doc- SAreview- TCPreview- ITSreview- ATSreview- UIRwalkthrough- ATRwalkthrough- UMwalkthrough- Code1N.A.This code was under test campaign Code2inspection-code-

General Statistics Quality Assurance Activities General Statistics# Total minor defects found in eighteen (18) documents 896 Total major defects found in eighteen (18) documents 12 Average of Nº defects found by document49.8 Nº of pages under review306 Nº of defects found by page2.9 Work time in documents267 hours Work time in document reviews128 hours Nº of Walkthroughs8 Nº of Reviews8 Nº of Inspections2

Quality Assurance Meetings Quality Assurance Activities

Cost in hours of QAA Quality Assurance Activities

Total nº defects by doc & nº defects by document Quality Assurance Activities

Nº Defects by doc & by hour review Quality Assurance Activities

Time spent by page & nº of defects by page Quality Assurance Activities

Nº of effort hours by page & nº of defects by page Walkthrough Activities

Nº of effort hours by page & nº of defects by page Review Activities

Combined Results Walkthrough Activities

Combined Results Review Activities

Global Statistics Code Inspection # Java5874 JSP2444 VB.net1263 Total9581 % insp3.49% Minor Def5 Major Def7 Potential Hiden Defects Minor142 Major200

Change Control Activities Quality Analysis Report /2009 IPC ISEC-DEIS

General Statistics Change Control Activities Data StartData EndDays Impact Hours Reason QAP04/06/200929/06/ Environment Changes UR27/05/200931/05/200947Remove Defects UR12/06/200913/06/200911Environment Changes SA10/06/200912/06/ Remove Defects SA04/07/200906/07/200926Environment Changes TCP01/07/200902/07/ Environment Changes ITS30/06/200902/07/ Environment Changes

General Statistics Change Control Activities

Impact of CR & development time Change Control Activities

Templates, Guidelines, Repository Configuration Management Templates Guidelines Checklists Convention for filesname Google Docs + Codes + Groups Other Tools – MS Project is a complex tool ( Openproject should be an option next years ) – MS Office fulfill its expectations, but OpenOffice3.0 can replace it completely

Network Knowledge Quality Analysis Report /2009 IPC ISEC-DEIS

Areas Network Knowledge AreaDescription PM & RAProject Management and Risk Analysis A & R & I Architecture, Requirements and Implementation QA & CCQuality Assurance and Change Control TCTest Campaign

Forum Network Knowledge Nº Posts975 Nº Topics136 Avg~7.2

Wiki Pages Network Knowledge

Survey Quality Analysis Report /2009 IPC ISEC-DEIS

Configuration Management & Quality Management Survey Quality Assurance QuestionerScore [0-10] The QAP was clear and detailed enough.8.4 The QAP contributed to the successful execution of my tasks.8.5 The QAP contributed to the successful execution of the project. 8.3 The Google Mailing List (Forum) contributed to share my knowledge with my colleagues. 8.9 The Google Code (SVN & Wiki) was demonstrated being a properly tool to this project. 9.3 The Google Docs (Weakly Report) was demonstrated being an adequate tool to be used in this project. 9.2 The Quality Manager knew his responsibilities.9.3

Lessons Learned Quality Analysis Report /2009 IPC ISEC-DEIS

Summary Lessons Learned Start meetings at time Communication is important Simulate inspections (trainning sessions) Motivation, comprehensive and calm Right choice of development tools Time invested in the project planning Testers should follow the SA/DD development A software project should have a ratio of 3 developers to 1 tester It should exist control over software versions that are available for testing

Final Conclusion, Recomendations Quality Analysis Report The Quality Assurance Activities are conducted with rigor and accuracy. The team members followed the guidelines provided by the three plan documents: QAP, CCP and TCP. The number of change request (five (5) out seven (7) - only two correcting defects) shows that mainly the documents are developed right the first time. The final product conform its requirements and requirements are fully accomplished. The Quality Team presents a several numbers and evidences that proofs the high quality achieved. Those Quality Assurance Activities gave visibility to the team members in their weaknesses and confidence on how to overpass them. Fix a maximum number of defects to impose a new document review Record the unique number of defects found

Thank you !