T-76.4115 Iteration Demo
Vitamin B
I1 Iteration
13.12.2006
T-76.4115 Iteration demo
Agenda



Project status (15 min)
 Achieving the goals of the iteration
 Project metrics
Used work practices (5 min)
Work results (20 min)
 Presenting the iteration’s results
 Demo
2
T-76.4115 Iteration demo
Introduction to the project
Assembly Party Management System (PMS)


Assembly
 An annual computer party organized in Hartwall Arena,
Helsinki
 Several thousand visitors in a four day event
 Main events in the party are competitions (compos)
PMS
 Sever/client system for handling the Assembly party compos
 The new software will replace old system
 Old system has been used for years and is a bottle neck
for the party organizing
 Requirements are pretty clear
 Will be open source software
 Other party organizations can take into use also
3
T-76.4115 Iteration demo
Results of the iteration

The deliverables of the iteration
 Functional software





Project plan
Requirements document
Architecture document
Testing documents
SEPA diaries
4
T-76.4115 Iteration demo
Status of the iteration’s goals (implementation)


Original high level goals for the itereation were:
1. Implement a bunch of use cases (the list is on next slides)
2. Implement centralized user rights management and
authentication
The goals were updated during the iteration (Scope was
decreased)
 Centralized user rights management was moved to I2
iteration
 Some of the use cases were moved to I2 iteration
5
T-76.4115 Iteration demo
Status of the I1 iteration’s goals (implementation)
Visitor use cases
Status
1. Implement the following use cases
VUC1: Register to PMS (no user account yet in PMS)
OK
VUC2: Register to party
OK
VUC3: Manage user account information
Anyone can edit user account
info.
VUC4: Submit entry
Other info but the compo entry
itself can be uploaded.
VUC5: Update entry
Other info but the compo entry
itself can be uploaded.
VUC6: Vote
OK
6
T-76.4115 Iteration demo
Status of the I1 iteration’s goals (implementation)
Organizing use cases
Status
OUC2: Manage compo entry
OUC3: Submit entry for a visitor
OK
Other info but the compo entry
itself can be uploaded.
OUC12: See vote counting results
OK
OUC18: Manage visitor user account information
OK
OUC4: Retrieve entries
Moved to I2
OUC6: Sort playlist
Moved to I2
OUC8: Freeze playlist (reqs OUC6)
Moved to I2
OUC9: Export compo slides
Moved to I2
OUC13: Export prize giving ceremony slides
Moved to I2
OUC15: Export diplomas
Moved to I2
OUC16: Export results
Moved to I2
2. Implement centralized user rights management and authentication
Moved to I2
7
T-76.4115 Iteration demo
Status of the I1 iteration’s goals (documents)
Status
Project plan
OK
Requirements document
OK
Architecture document
OK
Test cases
OK
QA report
OK
Test log
OK
Progress report
OK
SEPA diaries
OK
8
T-76.4115 Iteration demo
Project people (1/2)









Janne Holm
Henrik Hovi
Jukka Uskonen
Teijo Laine
Henri Tuomola
Jukka Tornberg
Pekka Helkiö
Project Manager
Software Architect
QA Manager
Developer
Developer
Developer
Developer
Mikko Sivulainen
Customer’s technical advisor
 No effort calculated
Ville Vatén

The Customer
No effort calculated
9
T-76.4115 Iteration demo
Resources (2/2)
Original plan (in the beginning of the iteration)
PM
Ar
QA D1 D2 D3
PP
71 38,5 38,5 37
28
30
I1
29 81,5 61,5 63
62
65
I2
50
50
70
70
60
75
Total 150 170 170 170 150 170
D4
20
70
80
170
SUM
263
432
455
1150

The 20 hours extra for the
people with 170 hours is for
SEPA work
Realization and updated plan
PM
Ar
QA
D1
D2
D3
D4
SUM
PP
71
38,5
38,5
37
28
30
20
263
I1
33
77
51
80
80
58,5
76,5
456
I2
46
54,5
80,5
53
42
81,5
73,5
431
150
170
170
170
150
170
170
1150
Total
(realized hours and updates)
10
T-76.4115 Iteration demo
Effort used (1/7)
Estimated vs. Actual effort per iteration
500,0
450,0
400,0
350,0
300,0
Estimated
250,0
Actual
200,0
150,0
100,0
50,0
0,0
PP
I1
I2
11
T-76.4115 Iteration demo
Effort used (2/7)
Used hours per task type (High level)
Iteration I1
Design & implementation
Management
Architecture
Estimated
Actual
Quality Assurance
Communication
Other
0,0
50,0
100,0
150,0
200,0
250,0
300,0
12
T-76.4115 Iteration demo
Effort used (3/7)
Used hours per task type (High level)
Whole project
Design & implementation
Management
Architecture
I1
Whole project
Quality Assurance
Communication
Other
0,0
50,0 100,0 150,0 200,0 250,0 300,0 350,0
13
T-76.4115 Iteration demo
Effort used (4/7)
Used hours per task type (low level)
Iteration I1
Design and implementation (core)
Project management (project meetings)
Design and implementation (UI)
Architecture development
Design and implementation (DB)
Learning the tools (C#, subv., Visual Studio)
QA documentation (test logs, QA report)
Communication (IRC, email, etc.)
task
Course lectures or meetings
Unit and integration testing
QA planning
Test case design
Test automation (SEPA)
Project planning (iteration planning)
Review s
Requirements development
Other w ork
Documentation (updating w iki)
Usability test planning & execution (SEPA)
0,0
20,0
40,0
60,0
80,0
100,0
120,0
140,0
hours
14
T-76.4115 Iteration demo
Effort used (5/7)
Used hours per task type (low level)
Whole project vs. I1
Project management (project meetings)
Design and implementation (core)
Design and implementation (UI)
Architecture development
Learning the tools (C#, subv., Visual Studio)
Project planning (iteration planning)
Communication (IRC, email, etc.)
Design and implementation (DB)
task
Requirements development
Iteration I1
Course lectures or meetings
Whole project
QA documentation (test logs, QA report)
Review s
Documentation (updating w iki)
Unit and integration testing
QA planning
Test case design
Test automation (SEPA)
Other w ork
Usability test planning & execution (SEPA)
0,0
20,0 40,0 60,0 80,0 100,0 120,0 140,0 160,0 180,0
hours
15
T-76.4115 Iteration demo
Effort used (6/7)
Iteration 1 hours estimated vs actual
500,0
400,0
Hours
300,0
Hours left
200,0
Estimated hours left
100,0
0,0
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
-100,0
Week
16
T-76.4115 Iteration demo
Effort used (7/7)
PP (weeks 39-42) and I1 (weeks 43-50)
hours estimated vs. actual
180,0
160,0
140,0
120,0
Hours
100,0
Actual hours
80,0
Original estimated hours
60,0
Unused hours
40,0
20,0
0,0
-20,0 39-40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
-40,0
Week
17
T-76.4115 Iteration demo
Changes to the project

During the I1 iteration no major changes were made to the
project

Scope was decreased somewhat when we noticed that we have no
time to implement everything planned
18
T-76.4115 Iteration demo
Risks
The updated identified risks to the project are listed below
ID
Risk description
Effect
1
A developer quits or a project
member cannot do his job for a
long time (getting sick or
something else).
Crucial knowledge is lost.
Project scope must be decreased.
2
New technology causes problems
3
The customer has no time to
participate the project
4
Quality assurance action do not
find real defects (wrong things
tested)
Project slows down because fluid development is
not possible due to problems with technology.
Project scope must be decreased.
The project cannot go on as the group does not
know what to do and what the customer expects
from the group.
The software does not meet the requirements.
Depending on how badly things go wrong, there are
only minor annoyances in the software or it is totally
useless.
19
T-76.4115 Iteration demo
Project plan (1/5)
Stakeholders and staffing
20
T-76.4115 Iteration demo
Project plan (2/5)
Project goals
1.
2.
3.
4.
Replace the old system with a new one
 excellent framework to build on
 minimum amount of functionality to be able to replace
Create high quality system with excellent maintainability and
further development possibilities
Create more advanced features to the system
Some of the project members continue in the project after the
course
21
T-76.4115 Iteration demo
Project plan (3/5)
Project practices







Iterative, incremental development (course dictates)
Documents will be written in HTML
 Will be exported to PDF when needed
Risks gone through and analyzed in each project meeting
Time tracking: weekly effort reports to PM
Small groups (UI, architecture, requirements)
Communication: IRC, email, weekly meetings
Defect tracking: Trac
22
T-76.4115 Iteration demo
Project plan (4/5)
Tools







Programming languages: C#, PHP5
MONO framework
Visual Studio for code generation
Subversion for version control
PostgreSQL database
Apache web server
XHTML compliant UI
23
T-76.4115 Iteration demo
Project plan (5/5)
Phasing

The work will be conducted in three iterations



Project planning
Implementation 1
Implementation 2
24
T-76.4115 Iteration demo
Used work practices (1/3)
Mandatory work practices



Iterative work
 Natural choice
Time reporting
 Collecting by email is frustrating
 We would need a way of reporting hours directly to some
system
Version control (Subversion)
 Natural
25
T-76.4115 Iteration demo
Used work practices (2/3)
Own work practices



Weekly meetings
 First meetings were too long (2 hours or so)
 We have managed to shorten the meetings with SCRUM type
meetings (now about 1 hour)
 We will continue the weekly meeting practice in I2 iteration
Communication: IRC, email
 IRC is our main communication tool
 However, not everyone is “hanging” on IRC all day long
 Email is used for important messages
Web pages
 Trac (https://dev.assembly.org/trac/pms/)
 Our internal wiki
 pms.dy.fi
 Our public web pages
26
T-76.4115 Iteration demo
Used work practices (3/3)
Work practices in the future
It seems that the work practices we’re using are working pretty well
 We moved the hour reporting to Trac



Now everyone has a common place where to report hours
Still all the tasks needs to be ”mapped” to our higher level tasks by
hand
We need to have real reflection workshop to find out if project
manager’s view is correct 
27
T-76.4115 Iteration demo
Demo


Visitor UI
System administrator UI
28