T-76.115 Project Review Groupname [PP|…|DE] Iteration 30.10.2003.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
T Project Review X-tremeIT I2 Iteration
Advertisements

T Project Review I3 Iteration T Project Review X-TremeIT Valeria, Konstantin, Roman, Olesia, Vladislav, Seppo, Aleksandr 2 Agenda.
VirtuCo Implementation 1 Project Review
T Project Review VirtuCo PP Iteration
T Iteration Demo BaseByters [I1] Iteration
Stoimen Stoimenov QA Engineer QA Engineer SitefinityLeads,SitefinityTeam6 Telerik QA Academy Telerik QA Academy.
Planning Iteration Demo Suunto Training Program Planner.
FINAL DEMO Apollo Crew, group 3 T SW Development Project.
T Project Review RoadRunners [PP] Iteration
T Project Review Magnificent Seven Project planning iteration
T Iteration Demo Team WiseGUI I2 Iteration
T Iteration Demo BetaTeam PP Iteration
T Project Review ITSUPS Implementation
T Project Review TeXlipse [I2] Iteration
T Project Review eGo I3 Iteration
T Final Demo Xylophone I2 Iteration
T Project Review X-tremeIT I1 Iteration
T Final Demo Tikkaajat I2 Iteration
T Iteration Demo CloudSizzle PP Iteration
T Final demo I2 Iteration Agenda  Product presentation (20 min) ‏  Project close-up (20 min) ‏ Evaluation of the results  Questions.
T Project Review Tetrastone [Iteration 2]
T Iteration Demo BitPlayers I2 Iteration
T Iteration Demo Apollo Crew I1 Iteration
T Project Review WellIT PP Iteration
T Iteration Demo Group name [PP|I1|I2] Iteration
T Iteration Demo OSLC 2.0 I1 Iteration
T Project Review Tetrastone Projext Planning Iteration
T Iteration Demo METAXA PP Iteration 17 November November November 2015.
T Project Review Sotanorsu I3 Iteration
T Project Review (Template for PI and I1 phases) Group name [PI|I1] Phase
T Project Review RoadRunners [IM1] Iteration
T Iteration Demo Team DTT I1 Iteration
T Iteration Demo BitPlayers I1 Iteration
T Iteration Demo Team 13 I1 Iteration
T Project Review eGo PP Iteration
T Iteration Demo Hermes Team [I1] Iteration
T Sprint Demo Team Tarantino Iteration 1 / Sprint
T Project Review RoadRunners [IM3] Iteration
T Final Demo BaseByters T Final demo 2 Agenda  Project introduction (5 min)  Project status (5 min)  achieving the goals.
T Project Review eGo I2 Iteration
T Iteration Demo BetaTeam I2 Iteration, Final Solution
T Iteration Demo Team DTT Project planning (PP) Iteration
T Iteration Demo Software Trickery I2 Iteration
T Project Review WellIT I2 Iteration
T Iteration Demo Group name [PP|I1|I2] Iteration
T Iteration Demo BetaTeam I1 Iteration
T Project Review Sotanorsu I1 Iteration
T Iteration I1 Demo Software Trickery PP Iteration
T Iteration Demo Tikkaajat [PP] Iteration
T Project Review MalliPerhe Iteration 3 Implementation
T Project Review ITSUPS Implementation
T Iteration Demo MapGuide based Web Edit Interface I2 Iteration
T Project Review RoadMappers I2 Iteration
T Project Review Rajoitteiset I2 Iteration
T Project Review Muuntaja I1 Iteration
T Iteration Demo Tempus I1 Iteration
T Iteration Demo BitPlayers PP Iteration
T Project Review MTS [PP] Iteration
T Project Review Wellit I1 Iteration
T Project Review Sotanorsu I2 Iteration
T Iteration Demo LicenseChecker I2 Iteration
T Project Review X-tremeIT PP Iteration
T Project Review MalliPerhe PP Iteration
T Iteration Demo Vitamin B PP Iteration
T Project Review X-tremeIT I1 Iteration
Groupname [PP|…|FD] Iteration
TeXlipse [I1] Iteration
Project Review Team name
T Project Review Group: pdm I2 Iteration
Implementation 3 Project Review
Presentation transcript:

T Project Review Groupname [PP|…|DE] Iteration

T Project Review 2 Agenda  Project status (x min)  achieving the goals of the iteration  project metrics  Used work practices (x min)  Completed work (x min)  presenting the iteration’s results  demo  Plans for the next iteration (5 min)  This template contains the minimum set of topics covered in the reviews, you may add new slides, but consider the available time

T Project Review 3 Status of planned goals of the iteration  Goal 1: Specify the goals of the project from all perspectives  OK  Goal 2: Select and adapt work practices to be used in the project  NOT OK, because …  Goal 3: Make the contract with the customer  DISCARDED/ MOVED LATER, because …

T Project Review 4 Status of planned deliverables of the iteration  Project Plan  OK, except chapter 1.3, because …  Requirements document  OK, most important requirements in general, and sub system X in detail  Use cases 1,3,6,12,15 implemented and tested  OK

T Project Review 5 Realization of the tasks  Explain the reasons for major discrepancies  estimation problems  new/deferred tasks  unplanned work Tip! Ctrl+Alt+PrintScrn in Trapoli Ctrl+V in PowerPoint Use Crop (Drawing toolbar) Tip! Ctrl+Alt+PrintScrn in Trapoli Ctrl+V in PowerPoint Use Crop (Drawing toolbar)

T Project Review 6 Working hours by person  Explain the reasons for major discrepancies in realizations  Explain the reasons for changes in the plan RealPlanDiff Member M M M M M M Total Realized hours in this iterationPlan in the beginning of this iteration PP Subtot I1I2I3DETotal M M M M M M M Total Latest plan (inc. realized hours and other updates) PPI1 Subtot I2I3DETotal M M M M M M M Total

T Project Review 7 Quality metrics  Description of blocker and critical bugs found and open  other QA metrics  unit test coverage  code reviews  source code metrics ... I1I2I3DETotal Reported Closed Open 535 … or make a more detailed table/graph, where you show per module bugs, and/or classifications per criticality, origin (own system testing, code reviews, customer, peer group) etc. Bug metrics BlockersCriticalMajorMinorTrivialTotal Total open This iteration reported

T Project Review 8 Quality assessment  Evaluate the quality of the different functional areas of the system  how much effort has been put on test execution  what is the coverage of testing  what can you say about the quality of the particular component based on your test results and ’gut feeling’ during testing  is the number of reported bugs low because of lack of testing or high because of intensive testing  Assess the quality status of the system against the goals of the iteration Functional areaCoverageQualityComments File conversions2 Only few minor defects found, very efficient implementation. GUI editor0  Not started Encoder3  2 critical bugs found during last test round, lots of small problems Admin tools1  Nothing serious yet 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

T Project Review 9 Software size in Lines of Code (LOC)  Any remarks on this metric?  lots of new functinality was implemented  refactoring reduced LOC PPI1I2I3DE Total (NCLOC + COM) Comments (COM) PPI1I2I3DE Total – part A Com – part A Total – part B Com – part B Total – part C Com – part C Total Comments … or make a more detailed table, where you can show per module LOCs, or proportion of real code vs. test code

T Project Review 10 Changes to the project  Any other major changes to the project, not yet discussed  goals of the project  goals of the coming iterations  project organization  requirements  technologies  …

T Project Review 11 Risks  How have you done risk management?  What is the current situation regarding the risks?  materialized risks?  new risks identified?

T Project Review 12 Work practices  How have you been using the planned work practices, what are the experiences of  mandatory practices: time reporting, version control, …  personal SE assignments  not all in every review, but when there are some interesting findings etc.  other practices  Are you going to  adopt some new practices  change the use of the current practices  stop using some adopted practices

T Project Review 13 Example: Test-first approach (N.N.)  Test-first was adopted by 3 coders after short training by N.N.  They used it first for all new code, but later only in modules x,y,z, because …  Metrics  the amount of unit test code is 1000 LOC (20% of total LOC)  80% of test code was written before the real code  effort N.N. spent on preparing the adoption (reading about test-first, planning, training) was 12h  effort the team spent on learning the practice was 7h  Positive experiences  …  Negative experiences  it does not work when xxx because yyy  Overall  the practice seems to be useful  In the next iteration the use of the practice will be slightly changed by adopting the JUnit tool  …

T Project Review 14 Results of the iteration  Briefly describe the substance of the major deliverables of the iteration, e.g., the following in the relevant iterations (avoid repeating the stuff you have already told in project status and concentrate on elaborating what was done)  project plan  requirements  system architecture  implemented use cases (will be demonstrated later)  user’s manual  studies made  Demonstrate the developed software  first tell briefly to the audience what you are going to demonstrate (perhaps distribute a demo script to the audience)  concentrate on new functionality in each review

T Project Review 15 Example: Project plan  Background of the project  Project organization  Project goals  Project resources  Project practices and tools  Iterations  Risk management plan  …

T Project Review 16 Example: Demo  System Administrator  function X  function Y  …  Basic user  function Z1  function Z2  …

T Project Review 17 Plan for the next iteration  Goals  Goal 1  Goal 2  Goal 3 ...  Goal N  Deliverables  Deliverable 1  Deliverable 2 ...  Deliverable N  Priorities between goals  Risks / uncertainties  Schedule  task dependencies  internal deadlines