T-76.115 Project Review

1
T-76.115 Project Review

• eGo
• PP Iteration29.10.2003

2
Agenda

• Project status (15 min)
• achieving the goals of the iteration
• project metrics
• Used work practices (5 min)
• Completed work (20 min)
• presenting the iterations results
• Plans for the next iteration (5 min)

3
Status of planned goals of the iteration

• learning to know project team members, individual
  strengths and weaknesses, special interests etc.
• OK
• constructing the IPR agreement
• OK, agreement done (IF the last persons have sign
  the agreement in the project review)
• understanding the domain and the customer needs
• OK, the project team feels it has a good overall
  understanding of the domain
• planning the project, including
• project team members' responsibilities
• OK
• phasing of the project into four iterations
• OK, phasing has been accepted by all stakeholders
  
• creating preliminary tasks for the next iteration
• OK, see below
• selecting the most important tools and processes
  to be used in the project
• Partially OK, questionnaire input tool selection
  postponed to I1
• defining project group's own goals in the project
• OK

4
Status of planned goals of the iteration, cont.

• requirements specification on general level,
  identifying the use cases and describing in
  greater detail the ones selected to be
  implemented in the first implementation iteration
• OK
• arranging communication channels group web
  server, group e-mail address
• OK, Hiekkalaatikko operational and yahoogroups
  address chosen
• familiarizing in the technologies and development
  tools to be used in the project
• JBoss J2EE
• Not OK, all project members dont have sufficient
  skills
• Eclipse plug-ins
• OK
• using CVS
• OK
• installing the development environment to the
  development server and building the project
  skeleton to CVS so that starting the actual work
  is as fluent as possible
• OK

5
Status of planned deliverables of the iteration

• Project Plan
• OK, all relevant chapters and phasing for I1
  ready
• Requirements document
• OK, most important requirements in general, and
  project manager interface in detail (use cases 1
  through 4)
• Functional requirements only specified to the
  parts implemented in I1

6
Realization of the tasks

• Time scheduled well, total difference is minus
  14,65 hours
• Problems with using Trapoli in the beginning
• Tasks not descriptive enough
• People kept forgetting to report their hours
• Hours vanished (technical problem in Trapoli)
• Lots of Trapoli features were misunderstood
• Plan work methods and tools was superseded by
  write the project plan, because its hard to
  tell planning from writing in this case

7
Working hours by person
Realized hours in this iteration
Plan in the beginning of this iteration
Real Plan Diff
AHA 56,5 55 1,5
JKA 39,5 35 4,5
SLE 33,5 35 -1,5
LHE 44 45 1
JKO 31 35 -4
HTO 36 40 -4
SLA 23,5 35 -11,5
Total 264 280 -16
PP I1 I2 I3 DE Total
AHA 55 45 60 30 15 205
JKA 35 50 60 30 15 190
SLE 35 50 60 30 15 190
LHE 45 40 60 30 15 190
JKO 35 45 60 30 15 185
HTO 40 45 60 30 15 190
SLA 35 40 60 30 15 180
Total 280 315 420 420 170 1330
Latest plan (inc. realized hours and other
updates)

• We managed to keep within the scheduled time
• No modification were made to the future
  iterations plans at this stage, the 16 hours
  saved are left as a reserve for future allocation
• Note that task and personal hours dont match,
  someone reported hours while writing this...

PP Sub-total I1 I2 I3 DE Total
AHA 56,5 56,5 45 60 30 15 206,5
JKA 39,5 39,5 50 60 30 15 194,5
SLE 33,5 33,5 50 60 30 15 185,5
LHE 44 44 40 60 30 15 191
JKO 31 31 45 60 30 15 181
HTO 36 36 45 60 30 15 186
SLA 23,5 23,5 40 60 30 15 169,5
Total 264 264 315 420 420 170 1314
8
Risks

• The responsibility of risk management is handled
  by a group of three persons Hannes Tolvanen,
  Lauri Helenius and Juha Koivula. These three are
  attending the SoberIT Risk Management Module
  (T-76.633) and hence have the best knowledge of
  this area

9
Work practices

• work practices used in the PP iteration
• time reporting
• Because it took time to understand how to use
  Trapoli effectively in our group, time reporting
  experiences were at first very negative
• Now, with added knowledge and more specific
  tasks, we hope to improve time reporting
• version control
• CVS on the customers premises was harnessed into
  use from the beginning, in this phase mostly used
  for documents
• EclipseCVS integration works very well, only few
  minor problems have been encountered
• personal SE assignments have been selected and
  planned in the project plan, but none of the
  assignments have started yet so theres nothing
  to report.
• In the next phase
• the personal assignment practices are started
• all the other practices mentioned in the project
  plan are started

10
Results of the iteration

• Nothing to demonstrate yet, well focus on the
  documents produced
• Deliverables for the iteration were (discussed in
  the following slides)
• project plan
• requirements
• this project review
• Other results
• development environment ready for implementation
  start
• group members have development tools installed
  (Eclipse, Lomboz, JBoss)
• an initial project skeleton has been created in
  CVS and source generation and build automation
  work

11
Project plan

• Stakeholders include four parties Radar, project
  group, Karuko and mentor
• Karuko acts as the technical advisor team
• Each project team member has his own
  responsibility area
• The top goals of the customer are
• Quality
• Improving efficiency of the screening process
• Improving efficiency of the segment size
  approximation of large crowds
• Improving efficiency of small-scale ad hoc market
  data gathering
• Having a central storage and improving
  communication in a marketing research project
• Ease of administration
• Also the project outcome will possibly be used as
  a base for future projects by Karuko, and
  therefore quality of documentation, adherence to
  domain best practices and reusability of
  components is important
• The project teams goals are strictly
  educational, building a quality product with
  interesting contemporary technologies and getting
  a good grade
• Most of the recommended (by the course) work
  practices will be used
• Personal assignments include
• Heuristic evaluation
• Design patterns
• Pair Programming
• Automated unit tests
• Meeting practices

12
Project plan, cont.

• The project is divided into three implementation
  iterations
• I1 project manager interface, marketing research
  project definition phase
• I2 screening and interviewing, wap and web
• I3 data export, triple-S to external systems,
  better info about ongoing projects
• Risk management is done in the external course
  T-76.633 by three project member. Top-5 risks
  identified
• project group members busy with work, studies or
  private life
• customer finds a better solution
• customer neglects server administration
• group is not familiar with intended technologies
• test plan is inadequate

13
User Requirements Document

• The business domain is described in detail
• terms and their relations
• core competencies of the customer
• System overview

14
User Requirements Document, cont.

• Use cases and user groups shown in picture

15
User Requirements Document, cont.

• Functional requirements
• Functional requirements were identified and
  discussed grouped by the use cases
• Also general functional requirements were
  identified
• All functional requirements are named according
  to the MRRx.x scheme for trackability
• Usability requirements
• Web GUI for project manager
• Mobile phone used in screening
• Web browser used in additional interviews
• Quality and reliability requirements
• Data integrity, stability, error tolerance
• Also performance, scalability, documentation and
  further development requirements are discussed
• Constraints and limitations
• Student project limitations,
• Free software used in development
• Given user interface constraints

16
Plan for the next iteration

• Goals
• Have a fully working implementation of the
  definition part of the marketing research
  project system
• Testing done according to the testing plan
• User interface evaluation and design for project
  manager interfaces
• All technology evaluation and selection is
  finished
• Specification of all protocols and external
  interfaces is done
• Deliverables
• Technical specification of the core architecture
• Test case specifications
• Test report
• Software core
• Use cases 1, 2, 3 and 4 implemented