1 / 31

T-76.4115 Iteration Demo

T-76.4115 Iteration Demo. Neula I1 Iteration 12.12.2008. Agenda. Introduction to the project . We are creating gadgets…. … For which Suunto’s goals are…. … Which means that our key issues are…. Increased u sability Value for customers.

horace
Download Presentation

T-76.4115 Iteration Demo

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. T-76.4115 Iteration Demo Neula I1 Iteration12.12.2008

  2. Agenda

  3. Introduction to the project We are creating gadgets… … For which Suunto’s goals are… … Which means that our key issues are… Increased usability Value for customers Understanding the customers – Suunto and its users Brand recognition Understanding possiblities for sports web 2.0 Enabling external development High level of collaboration – as external developers

  4. Status of the iteration’s goals and deliverables Goals Difficulties and decisions Status 3 gadgets with working functionality Learning the platforms 2 Gadgets that will be developed to commercial Being reviewed by Suunto Difficulty of gadgets 5 Gadget prototypes Platform documents Platform documents 10 more prototype descriptions 2 new gadgets: 1 new platform, 1 new gadget Decisions with Suunto 2 new gadgets 3 new prototype descriptions Course documents Implement the quality assurance measures Done Progress report Implement the project management measures

  5. Technical Overview and Demo A1 A2 SimpleMeter iGoogle RelayChallenge Facebook Architecture Architecture • Functional view • Parts and interconnections • Development view • Class diagram • Functional view • Parts and interconnections • Development view • Class diagram Demo Demo

  6. Functional view Browser iGoogle Canvas Application A1: SimpleMeter User External data interface Browser Google DB API My Suunto Hosting of Application server My Suunto DB JavaScript source code Style Sheets Images

  7. Development view Google SimpleMeter Google DB Google DB LanguageUtils API Database Accessors Engine Simplemeter Preferences API My Suunto My Suunto DB Use Simple Meter View LoggingView ViewCommons

  8. Simple MeteriGoogle Demo A1

  9. Technical Overview and Demo A1 A2 SimpleMeter iGoogle RelayChallenge Facebook Architecture Architecture • Functional view • Parts and interconnections • Development view • Class diagram • Functional view • Parts and interconnections • Development view • Class diagram Demo Demo

  10. Functional view Application server Application A2: Relay challenge External data interface DB API API Shown in My Suunto Facebook My Suunto DB Facebook user data User interface Browser Browser User

  11. Permission/ logic HTTP GET/POST Mapper Managers Connectors Controllers Actions Pages Managers Facebook DB Connectors Databases Suunto DB Neula DB

  12. The Relay ChallengeFacebook Demo A2

  13. Earned value of development work compared to the initial goals of the project Total hours realized for the whole team (week 49): 825 out of 1494 Total development hours: 322,5 out of 624

  14. Used hours Team totals Developers

  15. Tasks We have been able to minimize non-productive work. The planned total development hours was 567 We have a total of 624 development hours

  16. Development work Planned Realized 322,5 / 624 development hours used 2 gadgets of working functionality. 10% decrease in work load 4 working quality gadgets. 3 commercial quality and 1 working functionality?

  17. DevelopmentProcess and Quality • Simultaneousdevelopment of autonomoustinyapplications • Threepredefinedqualitativelevels of quality as a customframework

  18. CurrentQualityPalette Green = UsedfrequentlyYellow = Usedtime to timeRed = Rarelyused

  19. DefectStatistics • Defectreportingnotconsideredveryimportant at thisphase  Side-by-sideprogramming and communicationhelpsfixingminorerrors in practice

  20. CodeStatistics • RelayChallenge 2795 lines • SimpleMeter 908 lines • Selectedcodingstandardstoonarrow and timeconsuming vs. opportunitycost (in lostdevelopmenttime) • Value-added?

  21. QualitySummary • Practiceshave to bevalue-adding • Preliminaryqualityplansaltered • Unittesting in minorrole (webdevelopmentlimitations) • Testcaseswillbeexecutedmostly as acceptance testing leavingintegration and system levels debatable • Defectreportingmostlyacademicexercise in I1 • Codingstandardsneedreviewing

  22. Requirements cycle Iteration cycle Sprint cycle Changes to the project • Project planning iteration: • Iteration 1: Goal discussion Learning Insufficient documentation Platforms A3: new gadget for Vista Documenting platforms Commercial quality is the priority New platforms is a priority A4: Same gadget for OpenSocial The priority is to complete the A1 and A2 gadgets to commercial quality and develop A3 and A4 to working functionality.

  23. Risks Customer satisfaction of designs and working practices risks minimized Sharing of tacit knowledge started and will be continued More time has gone to learning the technology platforms The interfaces from Suunto have not been opened yet. The technology platforms are not documented as well as expected According to the contingency plan: Goals have been adjusted Schedule has been adjusted to be more flexible 1 New risk has been identified: Time pressure from implementing the interfaces.

  24. Reflection workshop • To save time for coding, we will not follow the coding standards too rigorously. It doesn’t improve readability of the code. • Communications are working very well, the Friday meetings are very good, information flows and everyone knows what’s going on. Improvements • Is there anything that could be done better to help the development work? • Are the communications working properly? Key Issues • A lot of time is spent figuring out how to fit the development to the quality practices • A lot of time is spent mending the code to the coding standards – but it doesn’t improve readability Complaints

More Related