Transcript BetaTeam Progress Report (I1)

T-76.4115 Iteration Demo
BetaTeam
I1 Iteration
8.12.2005
T-76.4115 Iteration demo
Agenda

Project status (10 min)



Work results (30 min)



achieving the goals of the iteration
project metrics
presenting the iteration’s results
 Technical Specification and system core architecture
 Demo: beta version of Product Database Server
Used work practices (5 min)
Questions and comments (5 min)
2
T-76.4115 Iteration demo
Introduction to the project
Motivation: To implement and integrate Product
Database Server solution to current NAPA
product aiming to finding out the relation
database effectivisity comparing the current
shared file system.
Customer: NAPA Ltd ( computing-based systems
for ship safety and performance )
Customer Goals: To implement, test and delivery
a product database server, which work in
the first phase together with current shared
file style data manipulation. The new
solution will be integrated to the
application’s interface which already exists
and uses its interface functions.
Project members goals: Geting the product
database server work done with good
quality, learning new practices and tools as
a team with good team spirit.
3
T-76.4115 Iteration demo
Project current situation


85% of customer goals has been reached
Reached:
1.
2.
3.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.

Database ER model is ready.
The database has been implemented according to the ER model.
It is possible to test the database.
The architecture is ready and will support different end users.
Interface to the current system function “read” works.
Interface to the current system function “write” works.
Update the database Information.
Interface to the current system function “delete” works.
Will be done during I2 iteration (not planned exactly yet):
4. Replacement of the current, shared file style data manipulation by the database
server.
10. The software is possible to execute on a laptop (Win & Solaris).
11. There is a Remote procedure call (RPC) interface. (This is an extra feature!)


53% of Working effort from Total project effort have been used
Requiremets current situation in Requirements Specification document
4
T-76.4115 Iteration demo
Status of the iteration I1 goals (1/2)

Goal 1: To design the core architecture(ER model), the architecture in detail and
data model


Goal 2:The database implementation, basic classess’ impelemtation and unit testing
(read, write, delete and update)








Engineering Environment: Java, Intel compiling environment for Fortran, Visual C++
environemt for c -coding, Embedded SQL environment.
Sybase –database server
Building Environement: Napa Build and Eclipse (Java)
Goal 4:Familiarize with integartion and system testing environments


Database has been implemented and tested according to technical sepcification and ER
model. OK
Read functionality has been focused, implemented and tested.OK
Write functionality has been focused, implemented and tested.OK
Delete functionality has been focused, implemented and tested.OK
Update functionality is part of write functionality. Update works and it has been tested. OK
Goal 3:Familiarize with engineering and building environments


OK. Architecture has been changed from the first planned version and updated to technical
specification.
OK, Integration and system testing environemnt is Napa environent with the new database
Goal 5: Kick-off meeting with project group, mentor and customer

OK
5
T-76.4115 Iteration demo
Status of the iteration I1 goals (2/2)

Goal 6: Beta release of new product data server ( functional requirements
from ”must” category)



Goal 7: First phase of the SEPA




NOK, This has been agreed with mentor and customer and move to I2
iteration
Goal 9: Project monitoring and tracking


OK, all has been given introduction to their SEPA subjects.
iteration I1 diaries is in the web site.
Subjects are ( meeting practices, pair programmin and unit testing)
Goal 8, Peer testing is planned


OK. Database implemented, but not integrated to UI.
All functionality read, write, update and delete has been planned, implemented and tested.
OK, regulary on monday meetings
Goal 10: Reporting the project progress and work effort to customer and
mentor

OK, weekly reports to customer and mentor
6
T-76.4115 Iteration demo
Status of the iteration’s deliverables

Updated project plan (especially chap. 5.2 QA plan)


Updated requirements document


OK, this document
Release note


NOK, move to next iteration.
Progress report


OK
Peer testing instructions


OK
Test report and test log


OK, UML diagrams for all the planned features ( read, write, delete and
update)
Test cases


OK
Technical specification


OK. Also I2 Iteration plan first draft
OK
Beta version of the Product Data Server

OK, it is possible to demonstrate the beta version.
7
T-76.4115 Iteration demo
Realization of the tasks
Design, architecture and Requirements, over run – 12.5h


Design takes more time than planned ( Lack of current system documentation)
Implementation, left 49h


Testing,


Design takes more effort than planned, unit testing very demanding
left 50.5h
Testing started later than planned
Testing tasks has been changed as follows:



"integration testing execution" ->"static testing of code"
"system testing execution" -> "dynamic testing"
Status
Real
Plan
Diff
(Left)
103.5
77
17
-26.5
80.5
90
10
9.5
87
136
49
49
Design architecture and Requirements
42.5
30
12.5
-12.5
QA: testing and reviews *)
73.5
124
50.5
50.5
PM: communication, reports,working hour
management
60.5
63
2.5
2.5
12
9
3
-3
459.5
529
143
69.5
ME: Meetings
ST: SEPA & engineering environments
Programming and PP : database implemtation,
read, write, delete, build scripts
Documents: relese note, web pages
Total
* unplanned task (= a new task added during the iteration)
8
T-76.4115 Iteration demo
Working hours by person
Realized hours in this iteration
Real Plan
Ulla Suomela
Jari Leppä
Raine Mäki
Hannu Kankaanpää
Juho Mäkinen
Kauko Huuskonen
Total



66
82
90
94
71
58
461
63
97
90
94
90
95
529
Left
-3
15
0
0
19
37
68
Juho was sick few days
Testing has been started later
than planned ( Kauko was
allocated to testing tasks )
This report has been made on
Friday. (There is 4-5 working
days left.)
9
T-76.4115 Iteration demo
Working hours by person
Realized hours in I1 iteration
Real
Plan
Plan in the beginning of this iteration
Left
Ulla Suomela
66
63
-3
Jari Leppä
82
97
17
Raine Mäki
90
90
0
Hannu
Kankaanpää
94
91
-3
Juho Mäkinen
71
93
19,5
Kauko
Huuskonen
58
95
37
461
529
68
Total





Implemetation has delayed
Testing period has been
started later than planned
Testing tasks actuals are
less than planned effort
53 % of the project effort
has been used
Report has been made on
Friday ( few I1 days left)
Ulla
Jari
Raine
Hannu
Juho
Kauko
Total
PP
73
24
36
5
1
2
140
I1
63
97
90
91
93
95
529
Σ
136
121
126
96
94
97
670
I2 Total
54
190
69
190
64
190
94
190
96
190
93
190
470 1140
Latest plan (inc. realized hours and other updates)
Ulla
Jari
Raine
Hannu
Juho
Kauko
Total
PP
73
24
36
5
1
2
140
I1
66
82
90
94
71
58
461
Σ
139
106
117
99
72
60
559
I2
51
84
73
91
118
130
547
Total
190
190
190
190
190
190
1140
10
T-76.4115 Iteration demo
Quality metrics in I1 iteration
Bug metrics
Reported
Closed
Resolved
Open
Total open
This iteration
reported



I1
20
I2
Total
20
0
0
18
18
2
2
Blockers Critical
0
0
0
0
Major
0
Normal
0
Minor
1
Trivial
1
Total
2
1
5
10
4
20
No Critical bugs founded and only one major
We won’t use severity classification normal anymore in I2
Two Bug’s are still open
11
T-76.4115 Iteration demo
Quality assessment, in I1 iteration
Functional area
Coverage
Quality
Comments
Parser
3
Tested
Read
2
Tested only with Unit-tests and code review
Write
1
Write tested only with Unit-tests and code review
Update-function not tested with Unit-tests
Delete
2
Tested only with Unit-tests and code review
Database
2
Old and new
0

We made a lot of static testing during week 48


Reviews for Read, Write and Delete
Database was tested with Parser.java


Not tested
No problems or bugs found
Unit-tests for java-classes
Legend
Coverage:
0 = nothing
1 = we looked at it
2 = we checked
all functions
3 = it’s tested
Quality:
J = quality is good
K = not sure
L = quality is bad
12
T-76.4115 Iteration demo
Software size in Lines of Code (LOC) N/A in I1
iteration




PP
I1
Java, Client-side
0
1120
C (JNI/Header)
0
956/309
Fortran
0
50
Test classes
0
542
Parser
0
508
Total (NCLOC + COM)
0
3485
I2
Comment-lines included
We made small changes in old Fortran code
We used Parser.java inputting testdata to database
Three Java classes



Db.java
Dm.java
DatabaseAccess.java
13
T-76.4115 Iteration demo
Changes to the project during I1
iteration

Peer test planning has been moved to I2 iteration



first draft is reday, but the document isn’t yet ready
Decision for postpone to I2 iteration in project meeting, change has been
communicated to mentor and customer
Testing process has been changed



Integration started very soon after implementation
Unit testing has been done after integartion testing
System testing has been doen only slightly
14
T-76.4115 Iteration demo
Risks

Risk management weekly in project meetings



ASA developer edition java support problems discussed with Vendor
 Risk not realized
Developer was sick
New risks, which have also realized



The documentation of current NAPA system was minimal (Overhead)
 Sharing infromation in customer meetings and emails
 concentrating only the most important NAPA features
One developer was sick (delay in Impelemtation and testing tasks )
Build script (to exe) is broken (delay in Impelemtation and testing tasks )
 try to find out, which library functions are missing with customer
 testing features through *.dll
15
T-76.4115 Iteration demo
Results of the iteration


Testing documentation
Technical Specification, System core architecture
16
T-76.4115 Iteration demo
Technical Specification
17
T-76.4115 Iteration demo
Technical Specification
18
T-76.4115 Iteration demo
ER-Model
19
T-76.4115 Iteration demo
DEMO

Demo: product Data Server beta version
-READ –operation from relational database
20
T-76.4115 Iteration demo
Used work practices







Iterative develpment
 Important to start the implemetation as soon as possible
 Important to have milestones during the iteration
time reporting
 creating working hour management system takes time
 difficulties to add new task to the excel system
 Reporting practices works well
Risk management
 weekly during project metings
version control
 works well
Requirements and change management
 during customer meetings
 important to write up decisions to meeting minutes
SEPA
 meeting practices
 works well. Important to sum up deadlines.
 pair programming
 unit testing
 statical metods
We are not going to make big changes to the current practices
21
T-76.4115 Iteration demo
Thank your time !


Questions
Comments
22