1. T-76.4115 Iteration Demo Team 13 I1 Iteration 11.12.2007

2. T-76.4115 Iteration demo 2 Agenda  Project status (15 min) ‏  achieving the goals of the iteration  project metrics  Work results (20 min) ‏  presenting the iteration’s results  demo  Used work practices (5 min) ‏

3. T-76.4115 Iteration demo 3 Introduction to the project  What is this project about?  Web portal to Simulation system Simantics  Bringing the power of simulations to the general public  Creating a community for simulation users and model/solver developers  Creating a marketing channel for solver developers

4. T-76.4115 Iteration demo 4 Status of the iteration’s goals  Goal 1: Simantics player & editor integration Simupedia  OK?  Goal 2: Basic functions of the Simupedia implemented  OK  Goal 3: Simupedia is running on the www.simupedia.fi- server  OK

5. T-76.4115 Iteration demo 5 Status of the iteration’s deliverables (1/3) ‏  Public site  Main page with menu  Ok  Search function  Ok  Solver information page  Ok  User registration page  Ok  Login module  Ok

6. T-76.4115 Iteration demo 6 Status of the iteration’s deliverables (2/3) ‏  Registered site  Model/solver/experiment comment module  Ok  Support for model and experiment publish  Ok  User profile management/unregistration –page  Ok  User support page (help/faq/privacy statement) ‏  Ok  Administration  Possibility to administrate all functionalities above  Ok

7. T-76.4115 Iteration demo 7 Status of the iteration’s deliverables (3/3) ‏  Documentation  updated project plan  Ok  updated requirements document  Ok  quality assurance report  test cases  Ok  test log  Ok  progress report  Ok

8. T-76.4115 Iteration demo 8 Realization of the tasks  The developers didn’t have time to work as much as they needed to  Hours will be fixed before the next iteration starts Implementation 1 PlannedRealizedLeft Project management1001981 Design300 Quality assurance60258 Project infrastructure1015,5-5,5 Programming294,5194,899,75 Documenting4043-3 Studying3011,518,5 Total564,5285,8278,8

9. T-76.4115 Iteration demo 9 Resource usage Original plan (in the beginning of the iteration)‏ Realization and updated plan (realized hours and updates)‏ Planned JoniJPNinaVilleAnttiJuhaOlegFerran Total150 PP4938262102 4 I15163747875787076 I250 706570 JoniJPNinaVilleAnttiJuhaOlegFerran Total150 PP4938262102 4 I14558474337314726 I256557710510311793120

10. T-76.4115 Iteration demo Total Burndown 10

11. T-76.4115 Iteration demo I1 Iteration Burndown 11

12. T-76.4115 Iteration demo Realized by categories 12

13. T-76.4115 Iteration demo 13 Defects and other quality metrics  Description of blocker and critical bugs found and open  Other QA metrics  performance analysis metrics  usability test results  source code metrics ... Use this template or make a more detailed table/graph, where you show per module bugs, and/or classifications per criticality, origin (own system testing, code reviews, customer, peer group) etc. BlockersCriticalMajorMinorTrivialTotal Reported in Ix 0110151945 Reported total 222025 74 Open 125101727

14. T-76.4115 Iteration demo 14 Quality dashboard  Evaluate the quality of the parts of the system  how much effort has been put on QA practices  what is the coverage of testing  what can you say about the quality of a particular part based on your test results and ’gut feeling’ during testing  is the number of reported bugs low because of lack of testing or high because of intensive testing Part of the systemQualityConfidenceComments File conversions 2 Only few minor defects found, very efficient implementation. GUI editor  0Not started Encoder  3 2 critical bugs found during last test round, lots of small problems Admin tools  1Nothing serious yet Legend Confidence: (use your own scale)‏ Quality: (use your own scale e.g.: 3 = quality is good 2 = not sure 1 = quality is bad

15. T-76.4115 Iteration demo 15 Quality goals  Evaluation of the status of the project's quality goals

16. T-76.4115 Iteration demo 16 Software size in Lines of Code (LOC) (or some better metric) ‏  Any remarks on this metric?  lots of new functinality was implemented  refactoring reduced LOC PPI1I2 Total (NCLOC + COM) ‏ 010004000 Comments (COM) ‏ 0100200

17. T-76.4115 Iteration demo Changes to the project  One team member has left the team at the beginning of this iteration 17

18. T-76.4115 Iteration demo 18 Risks IDRiskProbabilitySeverity 1One of the team members leaves the group. 23 2Server crash& Data loss13 3Simantics-system is not ready to be used during this project. 33 4Team member may not have enough skills to accomplish his tasks 22 5Communication is insufficient33 6Sprints are too short22

19. T-76.4115 Iteration demo Risks  One risk materialized: Roch got an internship in Paris and left the team  Fortunately it happened at the begin of this iteration 19

20. T-76.4115 Iteration demo 20 Results of the iteration  www.simupedia.fi www.simupedia.fi  Updated documents  Project Plan  Requirements Document  Qa-report (new) ‏

21. T-76.4115 Iteration demo www.simupedia.fiwww.simupedia.fi - infrastructure 21 Internet Simupedia server Apache – Web server Jboss Application Server

22. T-76.4115 Iteration demo Simupedia-application architecture 22 Simupedia uses Java Struts 2 framework which is based on Model- View-Controller 2 (MVC 2) Architecture In Struts 2 every web page has an own action class, which can be easily tested with JUnit. After action is executed, the actual visualization is done in.jsp pages. Picture from: http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/webservices/library/ws-arcstruts/ Struts 2 provides also a large amount of functionalities to help web development. For database access we are using Hibernate and the actual database is MySQL.

23. T-76.4115 Iteration demo DEMO 23

24. T-76.4115 Iteration demo Working Methods  In addition of mandatory practices of this course  Practices  Scrum-like iterative methods  Weekly time reporting in our time tracking system 24

25. T-76.4115 Iteration demo 25 Used work practices  IRC as a non-formal discussion channel works well  Wiki has proven itself a useful tool as a information channel  But it needs effort to keep it readable  Coding sessions every week  Voluntary but still very useful  Three sprints in iteration didn’t work  Exam week took too much time from the first sprint  There were too few hours made in the second sprint  -> Next iteration will be divided in two sprints