t-76.115 project review solidata i2 iteration 2005-feb-08
Post on 14-Dec-2015
217 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
T-76.115 Project Review
SOLIDataI2 Iteration
2005-FEB-08
2
T-76.115 Project ReviewT-76.115 Project Review
Agenda
Project status (20 min) - Arttu Overview on the iteration – Arttu Goals – Arttu Realization of Tasks – Arttu Working Hours – Arttu LOCs – Janne Quality - Mikko Risks – Markus Change management – Markus Work practices – Arttu
Work results (25 min) presenting the iteration’s results
Releases DEMO
Plan for Next Iteration FD (5 min) - Arttu Questions/Discussion etc (10 min)
3
T-76.115 Project ReviewT-76.115 Project Review
Introduction to the project
This project focuses on producing single-click Bluetooth connectivity between Symbian OS mobile device and Bluegiga server. The idea is to enable video streaming for smart phones in public places (e.g. train, bus).
Mobile
Access Point
Streaming server
Access Point
MobileMobileMobile
EasyStreaming application
BlueTooth / WLAN
LAN
4
T-76.115 Project ReviewT-76.115 Project Review
Overview on the iteration
A successfully two mini-increment’s plan conducted in the I2 iteration (not successful in I1) Increased quality
The 1st test round revealed nasty bugs which we were not aware we had time to fix some of founded bugs of 1st testing round
Motivation The motivation was kept up because of clear mid-milestones
Early in move The mid-milestones forced continuous work
We had good start in the I2, better than in I1 Plan + requirements were all set before Christmas vacation Design + implementation was started during Christmas time Original plan was to start implementation before Christmas this was over-optimisms
We (almost everybody) had relaxing Christmas vacation – as planned
The team members have had long absences (unreachable) Arttu: 2004-DEC-15 – 2005-JAN-16 Heikki: 2005-JAN-13 – 2005-FEB-21 Pekka: 2005-FEB-01
Internal milestones were updated once during iteration We had buffer in internal plan as response to changing conditions
Testing was completed on time 1st round: 6 bugs found (2 critical, 2 major) 2nd round: 5 bugs found (0 critical, 2 major)
Two additional testing packets released The goal of the iteration is very well filled
5
T-76.115 Project ReviewT-76.115 Project Review
Overview on the iteration – milestone update
Deliverable Deadline(changes bolded)
I2 iteration planning for customer/mentor Tue 2004-DEC-14
Requirements for I2 refined Thu 2004-DEC-16
1st testing release Mon 2005-JAN-24 – 18:00
1st testing round results Thu 2005-JAN-27
Test specification for customer review Fri 2004-JAN-28
2nd testing release Tue 2005-FEB-01 – 18:00
2nd testing round results Fri 2005-FEB-04
Delivery of increment’s deliverables for customer review Thu 2005-FEB-03
Document walkthroughs Mon 2005-FEB-07
Delivery of documents to customer/mentor Tue 2005-FEB-08
Updated
6
T-76.115 Project ReviewT-76.115 Project Review
Status of the iteration’s goals
Goal 1: Easy delivery ”Two empty access points can be set up using memory stick. The YES mobile
application can be used from the both access points so that re-installation is not needed when changing the access point ”
Goal 2: Configurable New requirements to make the APP configurable
Goal 3: Fix bugs founded in I1 Mainly fixed (bug #5 not fixed)
Req ID Short description
FR-APP-090 The bearer handling of the YES application must not disturb or be affected by the original bearer configurations.
FR-APP-050 When starting the application it must connect to an available access point of the YES-provider configured into the YES application.The AP must configure the SIS package to include the following:
- Access point name
- Bearer name- Initial URL (start page)
FR-AP-040 The AP must be installed by sticking in a USB-stick without other user interactionIt must be possible to use a single USB stick with just one release of the software to install multiple AP’s.Prerequisite: WRAP in correct version
FR-USR-020 The system must be possible to use without manual configuration.NFR-040 The user does not need to reconnect to the system within a single
system using session.FR-APP-100 The GPL license text must be included in the app so that it can be seen
in the file-system of the phone named as ‘license.txt’.
FR-AP-060
FR-AP-050
7
T-76.115 Project ReviewT-76.115 Project Review
Status of the iteration’s deliverables
Configurable version of the system implemented OK, selected requirements filled
some bugs still open Added 2 smaller requirements during the iteration
Project Plan Minor updates to update iteration plans, current version 1.44 OK, except detailed plans for FD iteration
Risk Management 3 closed risks
Requirements document 3 CRs (change request), current version 1.41
Technical Specification Complete, review held for version 1.1 (current 1.2)
Admin user manual Complete, review held for version 0.2 (current 0.4)
Testing overview for I2 System Test Plan and Report (includes test log)
2 plans+reports from both testing rounds Progress Report for I2 Architecture Design
No updates
8
T-76.115 Project ReviewT-76.115 Project Review
Realization of the tasks
Planned Realized
PP I1 I2 I2 FD TotalFeasibility study 86 0 0 0 0 86
Requirements 24,1 0,5 12 8,75 4 37,35
Design 4 77,1 28 10,5 4 95,6
Implementation 0 161,65 145 198,75 60 420,4
Testing 0 23,75 40 41,6 70 135,4
Finalization & Delivery
10,25 17,5 20 8,5 19 55,25
Meetings 84,65 33,3 61 31,05 40 189
Project mgmt 59,9 15,75 28 30,45 25 131,1
Risks 0 1,25 5 0,5 2 3,75
Studying 78,75 13 10 0 0 91,75
General 13,9 17,25 34 34 19 84,15
Total 361,55 361,05 383 364,1 243 1330
Unplanned
9
T-76.115 Project ReviewT-76.115 Project Review
Realization of the tasks
Design workshop was used Efficient
Implementation time was overrun by 37% Extremely difficult to estimate Bug fixes etc was not taken care well enough in the beginning New subtasks were added during iteration (e.g. INF:Maintenance) This includes also some ‘studying’ hours, because it's hard to separate
between studying and implementation. Learn by doing
10
T-76.115 Project ReviewT-76.115 Project Review
Working hours by person
Janne was sick for 1 week Markus moved to new apartment
no internet connection, yet
Pekka’s hours were counted incorrectly -6 hours for the iteration (383h vs. 377h)
Realized hours in this iteration
Real Plan DiffArttu 30,3 30 0,3Heikki 28 24 4Tommy 48 49 -1Pekka 79,3 78 1,3Janne 58,3 73 -14,7Mikko 58,8 55 3,8Markus 57,8 68 -10,3Total 360,5 377 -16,5
11
T-76.115 Project ReviewT-76.115 Project Review
Working hours by person
Overall, we followed the plan quite well!
Markus, Janne have more to do in FD iteration
more resources in peer-testing
Realized hours in this iteration Plan in the beginning of this iteration
PP I1 I2 Subtot FD TotalArttu 97 29 30 156 34 190Heikki 58 63 24 144 46 190Tommy 62 55 49 166 24 190Pekka 41 71 78 190 0 190Janne 37 47 73 157 33 190Mikko 38 45 55 138 52 190Markus 31 51 68 150 40 190Total 363 361 377 1101 229 1330
Latest plan (inc. realized hours and other updates)
PP I1 I2 Subtot
FD Total
Arttu 97 29 30 156 34 190Heikki 58 63 28 148 42 190Tommy 62 55 48 165 25 190Pekka 41 71 79 191 0 191Janne 37 47 58 142 48 190Mikko 38 45 59 142 48 190Markus 31 51 58 140 50 190Total 363 361 360 1085 247 1331
Real Plan DiffArttu 30,3 30 0,3Heikki 28 24 4Tommy 48 49 -1Pekka 79,3 78 1,3Janne 58,3 73 -14,7Mikko 58,8 55 3,8Markus 57,8 68 -10,3Total 360,5 377 -16,5
12
T-76.115 Project ReviewT-76.115 Project Review
Software size in Lines of Code (LOC)
PP I1 I2 FD
Total (NCLOC + COM) 0 2538 1853
Comments (COM) 0 779 1013
PP I1 I2 FDCCommDbDump (implemented as separate testing software) 0 180/2 197/2
CYesAOLoader 0 0 97/29
CYesApp 0 0 15/29
CYesAppUi 0 0 69/47
CYesConfig 0 0 236/206
CYesContainer 0 963/329 697/390
CYesDocument 0 242/112 130/112
TYesIndex 0 0 34/2
CYesProfile 0 0 126/23
Total (NCLOC + COM) 0 2538 1853
Comments (COM) 0 779 1013
More detailed table
13
T-76.115 Project ReviewT-76.115 Project Review
Software size (Continued)
The basis for the YES-App is OfficeAgent
Current implementation has reduced the dependencies for the original code
practically everything has been written again, own code this is reason for reduced number of LOCs Removed unneeded code from OfficeAgent
14
T-76.115 Project ReviewT-76.115 Project Review
BugID
severity end of I1 (30.11.04)
test round #1(26.1.05)
test round #2(4.2.05)
4 Minor Open Open Fixed5 Major Open Open Open6 Trivial Open Fixed Fixed7 Enhancemen
tRe-evaluate Open Fixed
9 Enhancement
Re-evaluate Fixed Fixed
10 Minor -- Open Won’t fix11 Minor -- Open Not verified13 Critical -- Open Open14 Major -- Open Open15 Critical -- Open Fixed16 Enhancemen
t-- -- Open
17 Minor -- -- Open18 Major -- -- Open19 Major -- -- Open20 Enhancemen
t-- -- Open
21 Minor -- -- Open
Bug history
15
T-76.115 Project ReviewT-76.115 Project Review
bug ID
severity description cost (h)
5 major User cannot receive the installation package if some other user is at the state where he selects if he accepts the installation package from AP.
3?
13 critical Application crashes if it tries to contact to some other BT then the AP. 10
14 major Application crashes if no appropriately named BT devices are found. 7
16 enhancement
Application crashes if prefix is too long. 5
17 minor Reading empty values from the configuration file does not work. 1
18 major Application crashes after going out of range. 17
19 major Changes in the AP's BT name may not reach the application. *
20 enhancemnt
The GPL license file could not be read with default software. *
21 minor URL longer then 50 crashes the program. 3
Open bugs and estimated cost to fix
16
T-76.115 Project ReviewT-76.115 Project Review
Quality assessment
Legend
Coverage:
0 = nothing
1 = we looked at it
2 = we checked all functions
3 = it’s tested
Quality:
= quality is good
= not sure
= quality is bad
Functional area Coverage Quality Comments
YES Application 3 Few major bugs still exist, but these are extreme cases. Functionalities are ok.
Access point 3 Not tested with more then two phones. Deployment ok.
Streaming server 2 All ok.
We could not test with many phones (>2) because additional phones were not available early enough.
to be conducted in FD iteration
17
T-76.115 Project ReviewT-76.115 Project Review
Quality - Description of configurable version?
YES Application UI improved – nicer graphics Improved BT connection handling, e.g. in closing the App. Tested with multiple phones, and with very ‘nasty’ settings in them Testing was performed also from security point of view more ‘interesting’
test cases
Access Point Can be released using USB stick
Does not include WRAP upgrading
Streaming Server No modifications during I2.
18
T-76.115 Project ReviewT-76.115 Project Review
Risks
Open risks Technology – 0 risks Development environment – 2 risks Requirements – 1 risk Resources - 3 risks Implementation – 1 risk
Changes Tech_Risk_1 (”Bluetooth driver”) CLOSED Tech_Risk_2 (”Properties of devices”) CLOSED Rsc_Risk_1 (”Too many hours planned for iteration I1”) CLOSED Impl_Risk_1 (”Responsibilities unknown”), propability MEDIUM LOW
19
T-76.115 Project ReviewT-76.115 Project Review
Change Management
Change request (CR1) opened to improve ’one-click’ requirement Opened in I1 CANCELLED CR2 has another approach for that one (configurable)
Change request (CR2) opened to improve requirements for I2 ACCEPTED Missing implementation for improved one-click configurable
Change request (CR3) opened to define BT connection requirement better, and add GPL license text into the APP
ACCEPTED
20
T-76.115 Project ReviewT-76.115 Project Review
Requirement Management
ComponentUser reqs, USR 0 (9) 3 (9) 9 (9) 0 (9)YES Client Application, APP 0 (8) 3 (8) 8 (10) 0 (10)YES Server, STR 0 (6) 1 (6) 4 (6) 0 (6)Connectivity, CON 0 (3) 2 (3) 2 (3) 0 (3)Access Point, AP 0 (4) 1 (4) 6 (6) 0 (6)Non-Functional, NFR 0 (4) 0 (4) 2 (4) 0 (4)
PP I1 I2 FD
WLAN requirements are still in req spec Streaming server has requirement for broadcast streaming not
going to be done Non-functional requirements (NFRs) almost implemented not tested
Legend
N (M)
N = # of requirements implemented
M = total # of requirements
21
T-76.115 Project ReviewT-76.115 Project Review
Used work practices
New practices used in I2 Started to use own task for bug fixings (mentor proposed) Improved bug analyzing price added for each bug (mentor proposed) Weekly code release for the customer Pair programming in mobile application Requirement matrix status of each requirement
22
T-76.115 Project ReviewT-76.115 Project Review
Results of the iteration
Major deliverables of the I2 iteration Configurable version of the system
Missing implementation for improved one-click configurable Admin user manual Test plan & reports
Minor deliverables Review report Change requests (3 pcs)
Updates Project Plan Requirements Specification Architecture Design Technical Specification SEPAs
23
T-76.115 Project ReviewT-76.115 Project Review
DEMO
24
T-76.115 Project ReviewT-76.115 Project Review
FD iteration
10-h
elm
i
17-h
elm
i
24-h
elm
i
3-m
aalis
10-m
aalis
Iteration planning
Refining reqs/arch
Design
Implementation
Testing
Peer testing
Finalization+delivery
Review s
Iteration planning
Delivery
Delivery for reviewTesting release
Testing release
Test spec review
PP I1 I2 FD TotalFeasibility study 86 0 0 0 86
Requirements 24,1 0,5 8,75 4 37,35
Design 4 77,1 10,5 4 95,6
Implementation 0 161,65 198,75 60 420,4
Testing 0 23,75 41,6 70 135,4
Finalization & Delivery 10,25 17,5 8,5 19 55,25
Meetings 84,65 33,3 31,05 40 189
Project mgmt 59,9 15,75 30,45 25 131,1
Risks 0 1,25 0,5 2 3,75
Studying 78,75 13 0 0 91,75
General 13,9 17,25 34 19 84,15
Total 361,55 361,05 364,1 243 1330
Risks in FD iteration: Pekka in Australia (not available
anymore for the project) absence of Mikko, Markus &
Tommy at end of iteration. Especially Mikko missing at second testing phase
Janne, Heikki to cover
25
T-76.115 Project ReviewT-76.115 Project Review
Questions/Discussion
DEMO
Requirements
Testing
Results – used effort
Implementation
FD iteration
top related