T76'4115 Iteration Demo

1
T-76.4115 Iteration Demo

• OSLC 2.0
• I1 Iteration12.11.2006

2
Agenda

• Project status (10 min)
• achieving the goals of the iteration
• project metrics
• Used work practices (5 min)
• Work results (30 min)
• presenting the iterations results
• demo
• For general information on the project ? see
  Project Planning Phase Progress Review slides

3
Introduction to I1

• 26th Oct 12th Dec ? 6 weeks
• Three sub-iterations
• Sub-iteration 1 26.10 11.11
• Sub-iteration 2 13.11 25.11
• Sub-iteration 3 26.11 8.12
• Detail iteration plan can be found in detailed
  sub-iteration plan

Note additional work for sub-iterations to the
course requirement. The main idea is to visualize
the working result and get constant feedback from
customer!
4
Status of the iterations goals

• Goal 1 implement and carry out sub-iteration
  development work
• OK
• Goal 2 deliver promised features to the customer
• OK
• Goal 3 Architecture design complete and approved
  by customer
• OK
• Truest building with customer and mentor
• OK
• Visualize intermediate development result to
  customer and get early feedback
• OK (3 sub-iterations with specific deliveries to
  customer)
• Finish all deliveries with high quality
• OK
• Achieve a good iteration result
• OK (development result is acknowledged by both
  customer and mentor)

5
Status of the iterations deliverables

• Project plan
• OK, except chapter 6.4 iteration plan for next
  phase
• Requirements document
• OK, all important requirements documented in
  detail
• Use cases 1, 2, 3, 5, 6,7,8 implemented and
  tested
• OK
• Functional requirements F1, F2, F5.1, F6.1, F6.2,
  F7, F8.1, F8.2, F9, F10, F11, F12, F14, F15, F16,
  F17, F19, F20 are implemented (18 out of 27 reqs
  in total)
• OK
• General Technical specification
• OK (approved by customer)
• Test charter
• OK
• Test result and log
• OK
• Progress result
• OK
• OSLC 2.0 source and build for Implementation 1
• OK

6
Realization of the tasks

• Show status and effort distribution per task or
  task group
• (not on too detailed level)
• discuss major discrepancies between the plan and
  realizations
• unfinished/removed tasks?
• any unplanned tasks?

7
Resource usage
Original plan (in the beginning of the iteration)
Realization and updated plan
(realized hours and updates)

• We decide to implement most of the features this
  year. (2/3 of all feature implemented)
• Yuan lots of time spent on updating
  documentation according to mentor comments
• Veli-Jussi GUI design took more time than
  expected as implementation with Java Swing is
  more completed than other approach
• Jussi was traveling and not available for more
  than 2 weeks.
• Mika the Java source file parsing is
  complicated. The original plan is not realistic
  for the amount of implementation work.

8
Defects and other quality metrics

• Description of blocker and critical bugs found
  and open
• None open blocker bugs
• None open critical bugs
• One open minor bug References-checkbox becomes
  out-of-synch
• Other QA metrics
• Test coverage 100 (test cases cover all the
  proposed requirements that can be tested)
• Development progress 64 (22 test cases designed
  for the whole system and 14 test cases carried
  out by the end of Iteration 1)
• Current quality based on test cases 100 (No
  failed test cases before delivery)
• Defects solution 97 (33 bugs found, out of
  which 32 resolved by 10.12.2006)

9
Quality dashboard

• Evaluate the quality of the parts of the system
• QA practices
• Pair code review
• Continuous refactoring
• Documentation review
• Heuristic review
• Testing
• JUnit testing 6 critical modules unit tested
• Test case based testing
• Exploratory testing
• Performance testing
• Confidence on quality is based on testing and
  test results
• Defects management Bugzilla, bug report
  systemized

10
Quality goals

• Evaluation of the status of the project's quality
  goals

11
Software size in Lines of Code (LOC)

• No source code reuse from last years project
• lots of new functinality was implemented
• Good commenting habit in general
• Unit testing done for integration

12
Changes to the project

• End user business review ? to get early customer
  feedback and increase confidence of the final
  delivery
• Note This is additional work to the course
  requirements
• Lauri took over the integration development ?
  this is something we did not think thorough
  enough
• Few requirements are moved to next years
  development
• CVS integration ? Next year
• special matching feature ? Next year
• Few new requirements
• Calculation on match finger print ? next year
• Use keyword matching to narrow down the license
  matching possibilities ? next year
• Consideration for upcoming GPL 3 license

13
Changes to the architecture from initial draft
Architecture has mostly been stable, a few
changes have been made

• Events to the GUI
• generated when processing of the package starts
  or stops
• also when a single file has been processed
• used to implement progress bar
• Iterator for file packages
• speeds up opening compressed packages (no need to
  unpack to temporary directory first)
• currently slows down opening single files
• improvement has been proposed
• Matching
• exact and partial matching is now implemented in
  same algorithm
• if match- is 100 -gt exact match
• caching of internal data structures to improve
  performance
• Small additions
• some extra methods and variables in other module
  interfaces

14
Risks
15
Used work practices

• Work practices carried out
• Bugzilla for implementation task management and
  defect management
• TikiWiki group documentation, discussion forum,
  communication, task distribution, group calendar
• Build process ? ant
• Version control ? CVS
• Code review
• Skype meeting saves time and money ?
• Weekly time tracking
• Weekly internal meeting for task planning, status
  report and risk management
• meeting agenda minutes
• Agile process
• two-week iterations
• 2-weeks tested build delivery to customer
• Unit testing ? provide the first level of quality
  confidence
• Get early feedback from customer
• Our overall process framework is very good and
  every member follows the process ? we will
  continue with this process in the next year

16
Results of the iteration

• The major deliverables of the iteration
• project plan (Implementation 1 Section)
• requirements (with detailed use cases)
• General system architecture
• QA plan
• Test session charter
• Test Cases, test result, and test log
• QA report
• Progress report
• Working application and source code
• Software Demonstration
• Demonstration brief
• distributing a demo script to the audience helps
  following the demo
• GUI Demo
• Command line demo

17
DEMO SCRIPT FOR OSLC GUI

• Use the Azureus package as an example
• Open the package, demo progress indicator.
• While it unpacks tell something about the UI
  design decisions
• CLI for power users
• GUI for everyone (Browser paradigm, tree for
  navigation, keep it uncluttered, overview for
  global results, treepreview panel for details)
• Show file contents, click ChangeLog.txt, point
  out "not a source file"
• Toggle overview, toggle word wrap
• Demo scalability, drag the splitter around
• Explain the overview panel
• Explain the tree view
• Icons with red indicators -gt conflicts
• Surf to EntityHandler
• Expand node, show conflicts
• Double click EntityHandler
• Point out conflicts
• Click details
• Double click AEMonitor, point out the
  "hyperlink"-behavior

18
DEMO SCRIPT FOR OSLC Command Line

• Handles the same file formats as the GUI version
• Easy to use
• oslc2cli path to files
• Configurable output
• Found licenses
• License conflicts
• File dependencies (references)
• Summary of results
• Help screen!

19
Thank you very much ?

• Questions or Comments?