t-76.115 project review
DESCRIPTION
T-76.115 Project Review. Rajoitteiset I2 Iteration 11.2.2004. Project status (15 min) Achieving the goals of the iteration Status of the deliverables Resource usage Changes to the project Risk review Work practices (5 min) Completed work (5 min) - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
T-76.115 Project Review
RajoitteisetI2 Iteration
11.2.2004
2
T-76.115 Project ReviewT-76.115 Project Review
Agenda
Project status (15 min) Achieving the goals of the iteration Status of the deliverables Resource usage Changes to the project Risk review
Work practices (5 min)
Completed work (5 min) Presenting the iteration’s results and deliverables more precisely
Project plan Requirement specification Technical specification Test report
Demo of Lmodels (10 min)
Plans for the next iteration (10 min)
3
T-76.115 Project ReviewT-76.115 Project Review
Status of planned goals of the iteration
Goal 7 (from I1): Building the basis of the client OK
Goal 1: Optimizing the model to shorten the processing time Not performed so far
Goal 2: Implementation of the linearisator OK
Goal 3: Implementation of the wrapper for the solver Mostly OK
Goal 4: Building the graphical user interface Functional, but limited
Goal 5: Implementing the client-server structure OK
4
T-76.115 Project ReviewT-76.115 Project Review
Status of planned deliverables of the iteration
Project plan Updated
Requirements specification Updated
Technical specification Updated
Test plan OK
Test reports OK for Lmodels-0.2.0
Test cases OK
Implemented software Lmodels-0.2.0 OK for testing Lmodels-0.2.0_src is not fully documented
5
T-76.115 Project ReviewT-76.115 Project Review
Realization of the tasks
Number of meetings was reduced due to the scheduling problems
No actual need for meetings
Variations in documentation are caused by Trapoli
Javadocs were planned to be written as part of implementation
Implementing solver proved to be more difficult then expected
PSEA took more time then expected
6
T-76.115 Project ReviewT-76.115 Project Review
Working hours by person
PP I1 Subtot
I2 I3 DE Total
Jouni Karppinen
45 35 80 30 40 40 190
Hannu Kauppinen
40 30 70 45 45 30 190
JoonasKekoni
85 40 125 30 20 15 190
MitroKuha
35 10 45 55 55 35 190
Tuomas Luttinen
45 70 115 35 25 15 190
VesaSalento
30 40 70 55 40 25 190
KalleValo
30 35 65 55 40 30 190
Total 310 260 570 305 265 190 1330
Realised hours in this iteration Plan at the beginning of this iteration
Latest plan (inc. realised hours and other updates)
PP I1 I2 Subtot I3 DE TotalJouni Karppinen 45 35 40 120 40 30 190Hannu Kauppinen 40 30 40 110 45 35 190Joonas Kekoni 85 40 55 180 5 5 190Mitro Kuha 35 10 55 100 55 35 190Tuomas Luttinen 45 70 30 145 25 20 190Vesa Salento 30 40 25 95 60 35 190Kalle Valo 30 35 30 95 55 40 190Total 310 260 275 845 285 200 1330
Real Plan DiffJouniKarppinen
40 30 +10
HannuKauppinen
40 45 -5
JoonasKekoni
55 30 +25
MitroKuha
55 55 0
TuomasLuttinen
30 35 -5
VesaSalento
25 55 -30
KalleValo
30 55 -25
Total 275 305 -30
7
T-76.115 Project ReviewT-76.115 Project Review
Quality metrics
Unit testing coverage still limited
Source code metrics (CCCC) now available from nightly builds Not utilized so far
I1 I2 I3 DE TotalReported 10 22 N/A N/A 32Closed 10 12 N/A N/A 22Open 0 10 N/A N/A
Bug metrics
Blockers Critical Major Normal Minor Trivial TotalTotal open 0 0 0 10 0 0 10This iteration reported
0 0 1 19 2 0 22
8
T-76.115 Project ReviewT-76.115 Project Review
Quality assessment
Systematic testing was started in iteration I2 GUI testing will begin as soon as development has frozen
it Test automation will be developed in next iteration
Functional area Coverage Quality Comments
GUI 0 Unfinished, not tested.
Server 2 Average. Works already, but probably has some bugs.
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
9
T-76.115 Project ReviewT-76.115 Project Review
Software size in Lines of Code (LOC)
PP I1 I2 I3 DELmodels- Comments
00
16952
262102
N/AN/A
N/AN/A
Nodes- Comments
00
382122
926332
N/AN/A
N/AN/A
Model- Comments
00
815
445416
N/AN/A
N/AN/A
Processors- Comments
00
510
436299
N/AN/A
N/AN/A
Formats- Comments
00
220
200111
N/AN/A
N/AN/A
Solver- Comments
00
1193
706284
N/AN/A
N/AN/A
Controller- Comments
00
948
150164
N/AN/A
N/AN/A
Web- Comments
00
00
46847
N/AN/A
N/AN/A
Server- Comments
00
913
1723
N/AN/A
N/AN/A
Client- Comments
00
12810
21632
N/AN/A
N/AN/A
TOTAL 0 1 304 5 771 N/A N/A
NCLOC 0 1 091 3 981 N/A N/ACOMMENTS 0 213 1 790 N/A N/A
10
T-76.115 Project ReviewT-76.115 Project Review
Changes to the project
Risk management was refined
New tool for GUI: Jetty
11
T-76.115 Project ReviewT-76.115 Project Review
Risks
Risk management task force: Hannu Kauppinen Mitro Kuha Tuomas Luttinen
Risk management practise was established risk identification session is held at the end of each iteration risks are analysed and classified 20-25 risks are selected for monitoring
TOP 5 risks:1. Saved information is lost from repository (CVS)2. Workload is underestimated and the group is unable to decide about work
distribution and responsibilities3. A communicational break leads to misinformation in documentation4. A member of the project group is too busy with other projects but lets others
believe he is still taking care of his duties in the project5. An unexpected feature is noticed, which requires plenty of time to correct
12
T-76.115 Project ReviewT-76.115 Project Review
Work practices
All planned work practices have been used
Usage of work practices have not been evaluated so far evaluation of practices will be part of last iterations
Trapoli has worked better than in first two iterations now only problem with one report
Pair programming, unit-testing, system level testing and heuristic evaluations were presented during this iteration
13
T-76.115 Project ReviewT-76.115 Project Review
Project plan updates
Resource usage plan was updated
Using Dia as a tool was defined more precisely
Project risk management was refined as described earlier
A new tool was specified Jetty
14
T-76.115 Project ReviewT-76.115 Project Review
Requirement specification updates
Minor adjustments were made based on feedback
15
T-76.115 Project ReviewT-76.115 Project Review
Technical specification
The reasons for changing from Tomcat to Jetty were added
A notice about GLPK not being thread safe and the need for our own modifications was added
Util package was removed because it doesn’t contain anything
The UML sequence diagram was modified based on feedback
16
T-76.115 Project ReviewT-76.115 Project Review
Release testing of Lmodels v. 0.2
Testing was focused on Lmodels Server Lmodels Web client and CLI client are only tools to perform testing
Testing was performed by Kalle Valo on 8.2.2004
23 test cases 6 cases failed => 3 bugs filed
Evaluation: There is still work to be done as even the most simple test cases cannot be
successfully performed
17
T-76.115 Project ReviewT-76.115 Project Review
Lmodels v. 0.2
18
T-76.115 Project ReviewT-76.115 Project Review
Plan for the next iteration
Goals Fixing found ”bugs” Optimising the model to shorten the
processing time Updating the documentation to reflect
made changes and final structure of system
Improving usability of the system
Deliverables Project plan (updated) Requirements specification (updated) Technical specification (updated) Test plan (updated) Test report Test cases Implemented software Installation manual User’s guide
19
T-76.115 Project ReviewT-76.115 Project Review
Plan for the next iteration (2)
Improving the usability of the GUI is the least important goal for the iteration
Risks / uncertainties How many bugs will be found? Are there serious problems in the current
system? Have we understood everything correctly?
Schedule Schedule and internal deadlines will be decided at the beginning of the
iteration
Thank you for your attention!
For any further questions, please [email protected]
RajoitteisetI2 Iteration
11.2.2004