T Iteration Demo Team DTT Project planning (PP) Iteration

T Iteration demo 2 Agenda  Project status (10 min)  achieving the goals of the iteration  project metrics  Work results (20 min)  Project plan  Requirements document  Used work practices (5 min)

T Iteration demo 3 Introduction to the X-Connector project (1/2)  Domain: process simulation, simulation model with several simulation engines (cluster)  Deliverables:  a user interface for defining data exchange between the cluster members  a test server environment for prototyping the data exchange  accelerated data access (Fast data access)  data synchronization scheme  Technology:  web service technology based on OPC specifications  user interface as an Eclipse plug-in

T Iteration demo 4 Introduction to the X-Connector project (2/2)  The customer of the project is VTT Industrial Systems  Prioritized objectives: 1. User interface implementation and test server to store data exchange connection information 2. Fast data access implementation for the test server cluster 3. Synchronisation implementation for the test server cluster  Team DTT’s initial objective is to succeed in accomplishing levels 1 and 2  However, with fixed schedule and available effort, the scope of the project may be redefined during the project.

T Iteration demo 5 Status of the iteration’s goals  Goal 1: Project planning  OK: Documented in the project plan, reviewed by the customer  Goal 2: Understanding the domain  OK: 2 meetings with the customer, requirements specification done  Domain turned out to be quite complex and unfamiliar to all the group members  Still some clarification needed  Goal 3: Familiarize the team with required techniques  OK: Tools are selected, aquired and communicated to the team; needed specifications have been delivered to the developers  Goal 4: Requirements specification on general level  OK: Requirements specification meeting with the customer, requirements document created  Feedback from the customer needed  Goal 5: Assessment of the skills and special knowledge of the team members  OK: Internal kick-off meeting arranged, skills of the developers identified

T Iteration demo 6 Status of the iteration’s deliverables  Project plan  OK, except chapter 5.2 Quality assurance which will be delivered later  Reviewed by the customer: feedback received, minor corrections made  Requirements document  OK (possibly some corrections after feedback)  All important functional (F1-F8) and non-functional (NF1-NF5) requirements documented  Sent to the customer for feedback  13 use cases specified on general level  Progress report: OK  Tool for effort management  OK, Excel-based solution: easy to maintain, provides reports of the projects status  SEPA diaries  Topics: Meeting practices (introduction), Heuristic evaluation (introduction), Refactoring (not started yet)

T Iteration demo 7 Realization of the tasks (1/2)  Status and effort distribution per task ( ) Work types: PM (project management), DO (documenting), DE (design), IN (infrastructure), ST (studying)

T Iteration demo 8 Realization of the tasks (2/2)  Realized effort smaller than estimated (~170h vs. 220h)  Over-estimated:  SEPA (-30h): Estimated 3 diaries, 12 hours each; realized 2 diaries 3 hours each (only introductional parts)  Requirements document (-7h)  Internal kick-off meeting (-6h): Estimated 2 hours/person; realized 1 hour/person  Under-estimated:  Creating the project plan (+5h): 3 authors, lots of work

T Iteration demo 9 Working hours by person  Timo and Mikko didn’t start their SEPA, others used 1-3 hours to their diaries (6 hours budgeted)  Meetings were shorter than expected Realized hours in this iteration

T Iteration demo 10 Working hours by person Realized hours in I1 iterationPlan in the beginning of this iteration Latest plan  Plan in the beginning of the iteration was inaccurate  Plan was updated in the first week of the project planning  In I1, Mikko has more responsibilities than Timo (UI development); in I2, Timo has more responsibilities  17% of the effort used at the moment

T Iteration demo 11 Quality assessment  Project plan was reviewed by the customer before the delivery  Requirements document has been reviewed only by the management team so far  Document has been sent also to the customer DocumentCoverage QualityComments Project plan2 Reviewed by the management team and by the customer. Minor corrections made based on the feedback. Requirements document 1 Reviewed by the management team. 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 Iteration demo 12 Changes to the project  Any other major changes to the project, not yet discussed  No major changes in sight at the moment

T Iteration demo 13 Risks  What is the current situation regarding the risks?  Risk log in the project plan: 9 risks with their effects, estimated impacts and probabilities, persons responsible  None of them realized so far  Identified risks  A team member quits in the middle of the project or something happens (accident, sickness etc.)  New technologies cause problems  The customer is developing some software components that will be used in the project but fails to deliver them in time  Project group doesn’t have the needed tools for the development  Requirements change in the middle of the project  Workload of the whole project is underestimated  Workload of iteration I1 is underestimated and (software) deliverables won’t finish on time  Developed software components are incompatible  One of the group members has difficulties to stay on schedule

T Iteration demo 14 Results of the iteration  Project plan  Requirements document

T Iteration demo 15 Project plan  Stakeholders and staffing  Project resources  6 persons x 170 hours = 1020 hours  Project practices and tools  Eclipse, CVS clients, Borland Together 2006 and C++ compilers (gcc,.MS NET c++ compiler)  Phasing  I1: User interface + test server, OPC DX  I2: OPC DA, Fast Data Access, Syncronization scheme

T Iteration demo 16 Project plan  Project goals  Customer: 1. Functional and usable run-time view on the connections 2. Functional and usable configuration view on the connections 3. High quality user interface component that can be integrated easily to other systems 4. Well-implemented DXConfiguration interface and OPC XML DX Kit (descriptions in technical specification document) 5. Technology to accelerate data exchange between the simulation cluster members 6. Test synchronization in the cluster 7. Support for further development: clear and readable code and documentation All the code follow coding conventions.  Project group: 1. Pass the course 2. Fulfill customer’s expectations 3. Gain experience in software projects

T Iteration demo 17 Requirements document  Functional requirements (in priority order) 1. Create connections 2. Browse connections 3. Monitor cluster 4. Group connections 5. Configure cluster members 6. Ability to automatically create two way connections 7. Ability to remove connections 8. Add/remove server  Non-functional reqirements 1. Commit to OPC DA and DX standards 2. UI must run as an Eclipse plug-in 3. Provide Fast Data Access 4. Ability for servers to auto select connection protocol 5. Synchronization of data exchange in a cluster

T Iteration demo 18 Used work practices  Practices used in PP iteration  Iterative development: Ok  Iteration planning: Ok, task list had to be updated after planning, effort needed was overestimated  Documenting: Ok, lots of work  Risk management: Ok, risk log created  Time reporting: Ok, effort management tool created  Version control: Ok, all versions of the documents was published in project’s web site  Communication:  Serious problems with in internal communication: too many messages sent by the PM, slow/no response from others  Meeting practices: informal meetings, will be improved later (SEPA)  Practices going to be implemented in I1  Improved meeting practices (SEPA)  New communication practices (TWiki, instructions for use, messenger)  detailed information in the project plan  Heuristic evaluation (SEPA)  Coding convention  Defect tracking

T Iteration demo 19 Thank you! Any questions?