1. Comparison of CMM Level 2 and eXtreme Programming Copyright, 2002 © Bartosz Walter Quality Connection 2002, Helsinki Poznan University of Technology Poznan, Poland Jerzy Nawrocki, Bartosz Walter, Adam Wojciechowski Poznan University of Technology Poznan, Poland

2. J.Nawrocki et al., CMM Level 2 & XP Plan of the lecture Introduction Software Development Studio CMM Level 2 eXtreme Programming Main risk factors in CMM & XP Conclusions

3. J.Nawrocki et al., CMM Level 2 & XP IntroductionIntroduction Problems with the classical approach Too much paper work! Too many meetings!

4. J.Nawrocki et al., CMM Level 2 & XP IntroductionIntroduction XP the Deliverer We do XP from the very beginning! code + test cases Forget it! Only artefacts: IEEE/ANSI standard 830/1993? Fagan inspections? Function Points? Oral communication much more important than written one.

5. J.Nawrocki et al., CMM Level 2 & XP IntroductionIntroduction Heavyweight vs. lightweight  well defined process  documents drive development  stable requirements  agile process  development = testing + coding  changing requirements or

6. J.Nawrocki et al., CMM Level 2 & XP Plan of the lecture Introduction Software Development Studio CMM Level 2 eXtreme Programming Main risk factors in CMM & XP Conclusions

7. J.Nawrocki et al., CMM Level 2 & XP Software Development Studio Teaching management of software development  started in 1998  external customers  8 team members  11 project teams  1 year long  started in 1998  external customers  8 team members  11 project teams  1 year long Customer University bachelor thesis software product

8. J.Nawrocki et al., CMM Level 2 & XP Software Development Studio Software development at university? Is it a real environment? Students work part time only... How about customer participation? What is the actual goal? Is it a real environment? Students work part time only... How about customer participation? What is the actual goal? University Customer

9. J.Nawrocki et al., CMM Level 2 & XP Software Development Studio SDS 2000-2001 SDS-XPSDS-CMM 6 projects Project Areas 5 projects many documentscode & test cases reviewspair programming stable requirementschanging requirem.

10. J.Nawrocki et al., CMM Level 2 & XP Plan of the lecture Introduction Software Development Studio CMM Level 2 eXtreme Programming Main risk factors in CMM & XP Conclusions

11. J.Nawrocki et al., CMM Level 2 & XP CMM Level 2 SEI Capability Maturity Model 1. Initial 2. Repeatable 3. Defined 4. Managed 5. Optimizing Key Process Area Practice Key Process Area Practice Level 2 is project oriented!

12. J.Nawrocki et al., CMM Level 2 & XP CMM Level 2 KPAs at CMM Level 2 Requirements Management Project Planning Project Tracking and Oversight Configuration Management Quality Assurance Subcontract Management

13. J.Nawrocki et al., CMM Level 2 & XP CMM Level 2 SDS-CMM Team structure Quality Assurance (5 th year) Project Management (4 th year) Development (3 rd year)

14. J.Nawrocki et al., CMM Level 2 & XP CMM Level 2 SDS-CMM Documents Initial Project Descrip. Initial Project Plan Requirements Specif. Conceptual Design Project Plan Detailed Design Development Test report Thesis Document Draft Formal reviews (SCCB) Customer acceptance Final document (SCMB)

15. J.Nawrocki et al., CMM Level 2 & XP IntroductionIntroduction Projects at SDS-CMM Requirements management tool Multi-projects management A client for remote databases A tool for multiple-choice tests mgmt Elective modules assignment tool Software testing tool Requirements management tool Multi-projects management A client for remote databases A tool for multiple-choice tests mgmt Elective modules assignment tool Software testing tool CMM XP

16. J.Nawrocki et al., CMM Level 2 & XP Plan of the lecture Introduction Software Development Studio CMM Level 2 eXtreme Programming Main risk factors in CMM & XP Conclusions

17. J.Nawrocki et al., CMM Level 2 & XP eXtreme Programming Values and practices CustomerDevelopers communication simplicity feedback courage XP values planning game short releases metaphor simple design test-first coding refactoring pair programming code co-ownership continouos integration no overtime on-site customer coding standard XP practices

18. J.Nawrocki et al., CMM Level 2 & XP eXtreme Programming Planning game Short releases On-site customer (part.) User stories Continuous integration Pair programming (part.) Test-first coding Coding standard Exploration We applied: Refactoring CRC cards Simple design We didn’t apply: SDS-XP process

19. J.Nawrocki et al., CMM Level 2 & XP eXtreme Programming SDS-XP Team structure Testers (5 th year) Coach & Tracker (4 th year) Development (3 rd year) Customer

20. J.Nawrocki et al., CMM Level 2 & XP eXtreme Programming SDS-XP Documents User stories Planning game Project scope Unit testing Development Accept. testing Integration

21. J.Nawrocki et al., CMM Level 2 & XP eXtreme Programming Projects at SDS-XP Requirements management tool Multi-projects management Health-care appliance system Internet client for DNA sequencing Software testing tool Requirements management tool Multi-projects management Health-care appliance system Internet client for DNA sequencing Software testing tool XP CMM XP

22. J.Nawrocki et al., CMM Level 2 & XP Plan of the lecture Introduction Software Development Studio CMM Level 2 eXtreme Programming Main risk factors in CMM & XP Conclusions

23. J.Nawrocki et al., CMM Level 2 & XP Risk factors Maintenance issues in XP How to bind user stories to test-cases and code? How to preserve system architectural design? How to understand customer needs?  difficulties in thesis completion  missing customer's business goal  poorly structured design Symptoms:  difficulties in thesis completion  missing customer's business goal  poorly structured design  business rationale for stories  metaphore + architecture  skilled students Solutions:  business rationale for stories  metaphore + architecture  skilled students

24. J.Nawrocki et al., CMM Level 2 & XP Risk factors Maintenance issues in CMM Level 2 How to keep documents consistent and up-to-date?  inconsistent documents  versioning problems Symptoms:  inconsistent documents  versioning problems  CASE tools (e.g. Rational Suite) Solutions:  CASE tools (e.g. Rational Suite)

25. J.Nawrocki et al., CMM Level 2 & XP Risk factors Customer involvement Customers underestimate their role. On-site customer is almost utopia.  customer is not available  customer cannot make desisions Symptoms:  customer is not available  customer cannot make desisions  train customers in XP  alternative communication Solutions:  train customers in XP  alternative communication

26. J.Nawrocki et al., CMM Level 2 & XP Risk factors Pair programming Some people hate pair programming. Pair-mate is not involved enough. Excessive cost of pair programming.  code contains simple mistakes  code is owned by individuals  certain people cannot work together Symptoms:  code contains simple mistakes  code is owned by individuals  certain people cannot work together  exercise pair programming  add code reviews  enforce changing partners in pairs Solutions:  exercise pair programming  add code reviews  enforce changing partners in pairs

27. J.Nawrocki et al., CMM Level 2 & XP Plan of the lecture Introduction Software Development Studio CMM Level 2 eXtreme Programming Main risk factors in CMM & XP Conclusions

28. J.Nawrocki et al., CMM Level 2 & XP ConclusionsConclusions SDS-CMM vs. SDS-XP SDS-CMM:  well defined process  easy to maintain  less dependent on customer  programming seems unimportant  needs a lot documentation  documents are inconsistent SDS-XP:  focused on programming  less documents to produce  stress on communication  needs experience  customer involvement is critical  problems in maintenance In students' opinion...

29. J.Nawrocki et al., CMM Level 2 & XP ConclusionsConclusions More quantitative results... CRITERIONSDS-CMMSDS-XP Projects started 65 Projects completed 65 Software delivery delayed 23 Software accepted by customer 4*2 Projects continued next year 20 Software installed at customer's 22

30. J.Nawrocki et al., CMM Level 2 & XP ConclusionsConclusions Sommerville-Sawyer's model Defined > 85 Basic & > 40 Interm & AdvDefined Repeatable > 55 Basic & < 40 Interm & AdvRepeatable Initial < 55 BasicInitial SDS-CMM (61 + 29) SDS-XP (30+18)

31. J.Nawrocki et al., CMM Level 2 & XP ConclusionsConclusions SDS-XP depends on people, not on documentsSDS-XP depends on people, not on documents SDS-CMM seems more appropriate for inexperienced developersSDS-CMM seems more appropriate for inexperienced developers SDS-XP requires constant customer involvementSDS-XP requires constant customer involvement SDS-XP and SDS-CMM both suffer from maintenance problems (though XP is more error-prone)SDS-XP and SDS-CMM both suffer from maintenance problems (though XP is more error-prone) SDS-CMM requires better CASE supportSDS-CMM requires better CASE support SDS-XP needs more management involvementSDS-XP needs more management involvement