t-76.4115 iteration demo metaxa pp iteration 17 november 201517 november 201517 november 2015

T-76.4115 Iteration DemoT-76.4115 Iteration Demo

METAXAMETAXA

PP IterationPP Iteration

April 21, 2023April 21, 2023

22

T-76.4115 T-76.4115 IterationIteration demo demo

AgendaAgenda

Introduction (5 min)Introduction (5 min) Project status (10Project status (10 min)min)

achieving the goals of the iterationachieving the goals of the iteration project metricsproject metrics

Work results (10 min)Work results (10 min) presenting the iteration’s resultspresenting the iteration’s results

Used work practices (15 min)Used work practices (15 min)

33


Introduction to the projectIntroduction to the project Language skills testing shifting from manual to Language skills testing shifting from manual to

computer-basedcomputer-based Less time-consuming (eventually)Less time-consuming (eventually) Less human mistakes in gradingLess human mistakes in grading Results ready-to-analyze Results ready-to-analyze

A working prototype already existsA working prototype already exists Not easy-to-useNot easy-to-use Not maintainable and hard to develop furtherNot maintainable and hard to develop further Lacks functionalityLacks functionality

METAXA will develop a software for a computer-METAXA will develop a software for a computer-based English exam for the Language Centre of based English exam for the Language Centre of HUT. HUT.

44


English exam system (English exam system (EESEES))

Basic functionalities Basic functionalities Creating & taking examsCreating & taking examsAutomatically checking and grading Automatically checking and grading

examsexamsHandling exam feedbackHandling exam feedbackExam data analyzable and linked to Exam data analyzable and linked to

student profilesstudent profilesUsersUsers

TeachersTeachersStudentsStudents

55


Status of the iteration’s goalsStatus of the iteration’s goals Goal 1: Getting to know the group and the customerGoal 1: Getting to know the group and the customer

OKOK, several meetings with the customer and the group, several meetings with the customer and the group Goal 2: Project planningGoal 2: Project planning

OKOK, project plan written, project plan written Goal 3: Decisions on technology and studying the new technologiesGoal 3: Decisions on technology and studying the new technologies

Decisions: Decisions: OKOK Studying: Studying: PostponedPostponed

Goal 4: Designing a draft of the architectureGoal 4: Designing a draft of the architecture OKOK

Goal 5: Specifying requirements on general level (including the Goal 5: Specifying requirements on general level (including the most important functional requirements and use cases)most important functional requirements and use cases) OKOK, the requirement document published and updated a few times , the requirement document published and updated a few times

alreadyalready Use cases found unnecessary for now, because a prototype existsUse cases found unnecessary for now, because a prototype exists

Goal 6: Deciding on SEPA topicsGoal 6: Deciding on SEPA topics OKOK

Meeting practicesMeeting practices Code re-factoringCode re-factoring Eclipse metrics plug-in & statistical analysis of codeEclipse metrics plug-in & statistical analysis of code

66


Status of the iteration’s Status of the iteration’s deliverablesdeliverables

Project plan (excluding Project plan (excluding quality assurance planquality assurance plan) ) OKOK

Requirements document Requirements document OKOK, multiple reviews, multiple reviews

Progress report (for the iteration demo)Progress report (for the iteration demo) OKOK

77

T-76.4115 T-76.4115 IterationIteration demo demoRealization of the tasks Realization of the tasks (1/2)(1/2)

88


Realization of the tasks (2/2)Realization of the tasks (2/2)

Work types a bit overlappingWork types a bit overlapping Unclear definitions for work types Unclear definitions for work types

within the group (time-tracking)within the group (time-tracking) Major differencesMajor differences

See the table above (MAN, DES, See the table above (MAN, DES, STU)STU)

ESTIMATED REALIZED DIFFERENCEMAN Project management 58 71.5 -13.5DES Design 50 21 29PRO Programming 0 0 0QA Quality assurance 0 0 0

DOC Documenting 27 31 -4INF Infrastructure 4 11 -7STU Studying 80 49 31

SEPA SEPA 15 7.5 7.5OTH Other 9 9 0

TOTAL 243 200 43

WORK TYPE

Postponed tasksPostponed tasks Developing use casesDeveloping use cases Presenting a draft of the Presenting a draft of the

architecture to the customerarchitecture to the customer Unplanned tasksUnplanned tasks

QA planning & documentingQA planning & documenting

99


Resource usageResource usage

The developers used less time than The developers used less time than estimatedestimated

Realized 13h on average (est. 23h)Realized 13h on average (est. 23h) SE-experts spent more time than SE-experts spent more time than

estimatedestimated Realized 50h on average (est. 44h)Realized 50h on average (est. 44h)

AA EJ HR IK JK PK SS YY AA EJ HR IK JK PK SS YYWhole project 214 243 29 46 12 18 15 10 38 67 9.3 42 25 23 23 21 43 46 21Iteration PP 214 243 29 46 12 18 15 10 38 67 9.3 42 25 23 23 21 43 46 21Iteration 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Iteration 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

AA EJ HR IK JK PK SS YY AA EJ HR IK JK PK SS YYMAN 69 58 -11 27 2 2 0 3 17 18 0 9 6 6 6 6 6 13 6DES 29 50 22 0 2 2 10 0 12 3 0 6 6 6 6 6 12 6 6PRO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0QA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

DOC 41 27 -14 13 0 0 0 0 0 29 0 9 0 0 0 0 9 9 0INF 5 4 -1 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 0STU 52 80 28 3 2 14 4 7 7 8 9 10 10 12 12 10 10 10 10

SEPA 8 15 8 4 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 4 4 0 0 0 4 4 0OTH 12 9 -3 0 6 0 1 0 2 2 1 3 0 0 0 0 3 3 0

SUM 46 12 18 15 10 38 67 9.3 42 25 23 23 21 43 46 21

TO

TA

LIT

ER

AT

ION

PP

Realized (individually) Planned (individually)Task Realized Planned Left

REALIZED VS. ESTIMATED EFFORT

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

MAN DES PRO QA DOC INF STU SEPA OTH

REALIZED

ESTIMATED

1010


RisksRisks

1111


Results of the iterationResults of the iteration

1.1. Project planProject plan

2.2. Requirements Requirements

3.3. System architectureSystem architecture

1212


1.Project plan1.Project plan

Project team: METAXA

SE experts• Simo Soini -- Project manager• Amos Ahola -- QA manager• Pasi Karppinen -- Architect

Developers• Eeli Jokinen• Jyri Kallela• Ilkka Korhonen• Hai Ren• Yang Yang

HUT Language Centre

Customer• Diane Pilkinton-Pihko• Ann-Catherina Berg (TA*)• Jan-Mikael Rybicki (TA*)

Mentor: Lauri Eloranta

Users

*TA = Technical Advisor




HUT Language Centre



Users





HUT Language Centre



Users


Customer goals Stakeholders

Estimated resources

1313


2. Requirements2. Requirements

1414


3. System architecture (1/3)3. System architecture (1/3)

Java web application (version 1.4)Java web application (version 1.4) Struts framefork (version 1.0)Struts framefork (version 1.0)

MVC-architectureMVC-architecture

For view layer many tab libraries are going to be usedFor view layer many tab libraries are going to be used

HTMLHTML

JSPJSP

JSTLJSTL

Struts logic, Struts HTML...Struts logic, Struts HTML...

MySQL –database management (version 5.0)MySQL –database management (version 5.0)

1515



Model-View-ControllerModel-View-Controller

1616



Locations...Locations...

1717


Used work practicesUsed work practices

1.1. Project managementProject management

2.2. Requirements engineeringRequirements engineering

3.3. DesignDesign

1818


1. Project management (1/2)1. Project management (1/2) Project planningProject planning

DoneDone Presented in the project plan Presented in the project plan Iteration planningIteration planning

Done for PP; I1 will be done weeks 43-44Done for PP; I1 will be done weeks 43-44 ExperienceExperience: Difficult, hard to foresee the actual progress, needs : Difficult, hard to foresee the actual progress, needs

reviewing during the iterationreviewing during the iteration Communication Communication

Planned & implementedPlanned & implemented TikiWiki, email, messenger, telephone, meetings (SEPA)TikiWiki, email, messenger, telephone, meetings (SEPA)

ExperienceExperience: difficult to get people to follow communication protocol: difficult to get people to follow communication protocol Time trackingTime tracking

Excel sheet for time-trackingExcel sheet for time-tracking Collected, summarized & published weekly by the project managerCollected, summarized & published weekly by the project manager

ExperienceExperience: Some difficulties with task-relatedness and categorization, : Some difficulties with task-relatedness and categorization, needs updatingneeds updating

1919


DocumentingDocumenting Written by team managementWritten by team management

Reviews expected by all stakeholders; monitored within the groupReviews expected by all stakeholders; monitored within the group ExperienceExperience: time-consuming: time-consuming

Risk managementRisk management Initial risks derived from “common” risksInitial risks derived from “common” risks Risk-specific instructionsRisk-specific instructions Risks reviewed and updated every 2 weeksRisks reviewed and updated every 2 weeks

Iteration demoIteration demo Process improvement Process improvement

Reflection workshops held in the end or iteration Reflection workshops held in the end or iteration reviews all the used practicesreviews all the used practices analyses them for improvementsanalyses them for improvements

The processes are constantly monitored and improved (if needed) by The processes are constantly monitored and improved (if needed) by the group. the group.

Iterative development Iterative development PlannedPlanned

1. Project management (1/2)1. Project management (1/2)

2020


2. Requirements engineering2. Requirements engineering Elicitation and analysisElicitation and analysis

Studying existing prototype (all members)Studying existing prototype (all members) ExperienceExperience: Effective & fast : Effective & fast

Customer meetings (3) and discussionCustomer meetings (3) and discussion The entire management team performed on-site and post-meeting analysisThe entire management team performed on-site and post-meeting analysis ExperienceExperience: Effective, but time-consuming : Effective, but time-consuming

ValidationValidation Done by emailing the document to customerDone by emailing the document to customer Unclear cases verified in customer meetings, one by oneUnclear cases verified in customer meetings, one by one Approval requested by emailApproval requested by email ExperienceExperience: Tricky, the customer knows what they want, but don’t : Tricky, the customer knows what they want, but don’t

necessarily link it to the requirementsnecessarily link it to the requirements Change managementChange management

Practice designed, but not yet discussed with customerPractice designed, but not yet discussed with customer Status trackingStatus tracking

Practice plannedPractice planned PlanPlan implement implement test test approved: “Ready” status approved: “Ready” status

Regular reviews (once in 2 weeks)Regular reviews (once in 2 weeks)

2121


3. Design3. Design Non-functional requirements will beNon-functional requirements will be

validated using proto typesvalidated using proto types Use-cases will follow functional Use-cases will follow functional

requirementsrequirements Use-cases will describe functional viewUse-cases will describe functional view

and tasks for the developersand tasks for the developers Version controlVersion control

Unix CVS softwareUnix CVS software will be used will be used

in I1 & I2in I1 & I2 Coding conventionCoding convention

SUN proposed Java coding SUN proposed Java coding

conventionconvention

t-76.4115 iteration demo metaxa pp iteration 17 november 201517 november 201517 november 2015

Documents

iteration demostatus

iteration demorealization

iteration demointroduction

iteration demookt

work types

project plan writtengoal

work type classificationsinf54

project planningok