1. SoberIT Software Business and Engineering Institute HELSINKI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY © Tomi Männistö, Varvana Myllärniemi, 2008 T-76.5150 Software Architectures Introduction to Exercise Spring 2008

2. SoberIT Software Business and Engineering Institute HELSINKI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY © Tomi Männistö, Varvana Myllärniemi, 2008 Exercise  Idea  To address central architectural issues in the form of group discussions around a case product  All groups work on the same case individually ➔ you are not expected to produce the same architecture design!  It is important to justify your decisions and retain the consistency in your design documentation  Group works on architectural issues of the case  Why’s are important!  Details will show up on course web pages  They will be updated regularly  Check before the each phase, as we try to take any feedback into account and adjust accordingly

3. SoberIT Software Business and Engineering Institute HELSINKI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY © Tomi Männistö, Varvana Myllärniemi, 2008 Exercise phases (Deadlines are strict!) 27.02. 14:00Stakeholders, concerns, and views 05.03. 14:00Message from the board 02.04. 14:00Design 09.04. 14:00Peer review 21. – 25.04.Evaluation sessions 30.04. 14:00Final design You may want not to leave this to the last minute!

4. SoberIT Software Business and Engineering Institute HELSINKI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY © Tomi Männistö, Varvana Myllärniemi, 2008 Group meetings  Main work of the exercise should happen in group meetings  Either physical or virtual  Discuss your design and deliverables  Make notes on the meetings  These will be returned as part of the exercise deliverables  The typical scheme of splitting the work into three individual parts and then integrating work a couple of hours before DL will not lead into good results

5. SoberIT Software Business and Engineering Institute HELSINKI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY © Tomi Männistö, Varvana Myllärniemi, 2008 Exercise setting  Company X is investigating the feasibility of building a system for detecting forest fires  The job of your team is to sketch the overall architecture and consider the most critical architectural concerns in more detail.  You only have very limited time, i.e., a bit over month from the first ideas to come up with the initial architecture draft.  The draft you will produce will be evaluated by a group of stakeholders, and the design will be revisited  Based on the final results, the final go/no-go decision regarding the production will be made

6. SoberIT Software Business and Engineering Institute HELSINKI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY © Tomi Männistö, Varvana Myllärniemi, 2008 Topic  Each group will target the same topic  A system to predict forest fires  An overall description of the case as well as a list of requirements for the system are given  The list of requirements acts only as a starting point  Many requirements are not measurable as such  Some requirements may be missing  Some requirements are not that important  Your task is to explore, expand, prioritise and concretise  Within the topic, aim for depth rather than width

7. SoberIT Software Business and Engineering Institute HELSINKI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY © Tomi Männistö, Varvana Myllärniemi, 2008 Phase 1: Stakeholders, concerns, and views  Identify architecturally significant stakeholders  Identify architecturally significant concerns; either functional or non-functional ones  Explicate assumptions and constraints  Concretise the most important architecturally significant concerns as scenarios  Identify views and viewpoints that are needed to design a system that fulfills abovementioned concerns  The returned document acts as a template for your architecture design document  Used as a basis for phases 2 and 5

8. SoberIT Software Business and Engineering Institute HELSINKI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY © Tomi Männistö, Varvana Myllärniemi, 2008 Message from the company board  After the first phase, each group may receive a message from the company board  For example, the company board may express its worry that particular concerns may be difficult to achieve  Before starting the second phase, the group must refine the results of the first phase by redefining and re-prioritising their concerns  The goal of the group is to take the message from the company board into account in their design

9. SoberIT Software Business and Engineering Institute HELSINKI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY © Tomi Männistö, Varvana Myllärniemi, 2008 Phase 2: Design  Design your architecture  Context diagram  Main structural view  Deployment / distribution view (optional)  1-2 views to address the most important architectural concerns  The material you produce should enable the review of your architecture design.  The reviewer should be able to see  That your concerns are of importance  That your choice of views is meaningful  That your views describe how the concerns are addressed (that is, reflect the design decisions that implement major architectural requirements)

10. SoberIT Software Business and Engineering Institute HELSINKI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY © Tomi Männistö, Varvana Myllärniemi, 2008 Phase 3: Peer review  Each group is allocated the architecture documentation of two other teams  Your task is to review their work thus far and give them guidance for future work  Write the review as a document  A checklist is available for this purpose

11. SoberIT Software Business and Engineering Institute HELSINKI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY © Tomi Männistö, Varvana Myllärniemi, 2008 Phase 4: Evaluation session  Select one method that uses scenarios for evaluation, and apply it to your design  Evaluate the fulfillment of the major architectural concerns  Present your design as well as results of the evaluation in a session  Each session will be participated by approximately three groups  Oppose the evaluation of other groups within your evaluation session  Details on how to reserve a time for your group session will be published later

12. SoberIT Software Business and Engineering Institute HELSINKI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY © Tomi Männistö, Varvana Myllärniemi, 2008 Phase 5: Final design  Based on the comments from  Peer reviews  Results of the evaluation  Feedback from the course staff  finalise your design document.

13. SoberIT Software Business and Engineering Institute HELSINKI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY © Tomi Männistö, Varvana Myllärniemi, 2008 Grading  Grading from 0 to 40 points  20 points = passed  Grading is based on  Returned documents  Peer review  Presentation in the evaluation session  Opposing in the evaluation session

14. SoberIT Software Business and Engineering Institute HELSINKI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY © Tomi Männistö, Varvana Myllärniemi, 2008 To get things started  Read exercise information from the course web pages  Discuss, think what is important  In real life, customer requirements, business case etc. information may often be inexistent, incomplete, incorrect and contradictory  There may not be a clearly defined problem to which seek a solution  It is more about understanding what are the aims and make suggestions and decisions towards them  Agree on dates for group meetings