Welcome page

1

Welcome page

Outline- Introduction- Status on each role- Special topic

2

3

Brief Intro

Team 2

McCabe Cyclomatic Complexity Analyzer

4

Planning

5

Planning

6

Team Earned Value

7

Why are we behind schedule

• The team didn’t close some of the 1st week tasks because the plan was delayed

• Some examples are:– Risk meeting X 6– LogD-LogT week_1 X6

8

Team Planned Hours versus Actual Hours

9

Team SUMS Estimates versus Actual

Main Loop DLD Lines LOC Counter DLD Lines

McCabe Complexity DLD Lines

Internal Data Binding DLD Lines

Coupling/Strength Ratio DLD Lines

Report DLD Lines0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

SUMS Estimate vs. Actual

EstimatedActual

10

How are we spending our time?

Manage

ment a

nd Misc

ellan

eous

Launch

and St

rateg

y

Planning

Require

ments

System

Test P

lan

Require

ment In

spection

High Le

vel Desi

gn

Integrati

on Test P

lan

High Le

vel Desi

gn In

specti

on

Detailed

Design

Detailed

Design

Review

Test D

evelopmen

t

Detailed

Design

Insp

ection

Code

Code Rev

iew

Compile

Code Insp

ection

Unit Test

Build an

d Integ

ration Te

st

System

Test

Documentati

on

Postmorte

m0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

Estimate vs Actual by Phase

EstimateActual

11

Quality

12

AnalysisReport DLD

Coupling Strenth Ratio

InternalDataBinding

LOCCounter

MainLoop

McCabe DLD v2

0 3 6 9

DLD defect Removal rate Goal: >3 defects/hour

DLD defects/hour

Part

s of t

he S

yste

m

Quality - Goal

• In 66% of inspections we meet our goal to find more than 3 defects/hour

Goal

13

Quality - Inspections

W2 W3 W50

5

10

15

Average #defects found in each inspection by type

Doc-InformationDoc-StyleDoc-Typos

Inspection Week

Aver

age

Num

ber o

f Def

ects

• We were able to almost eliminate typo defects• We get an overall defect reduction over time

14

Quality - goal

• Almost all inspections achieved our goal

AnalysisReport DLD

Coupling Strenth Ratio

InternalDataBinding

LOCCounter

MainLoop

McCabe DLD v2

0 100 200

153 ps_code/h

104 ps_code/h

93 ps_code/h

72 ps_code/h

45 ps_code/h

92 ps_code/h

DLD Inspection Goal: < 100 pseudo-code lines/hour

DLD pseudo-code per Hour

Part

s of t

he S

yste

m

Goal

15

Main Loop

Coupling/Strength Ratio

Report

Internal Data Binding

McCabe Complexity

LOC Counter

0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5

Develop. time ratio goal: DLD Insp/DLD > 0.5

Ratio

Part

s of t

he S

yste

mQuality - Goal

• In 66% of inspections we meet our goal to spend at least half of DLD time inspecting it.• Concern: are we spending too much? Maybe the goal must be upper bounded too.i.e.

0.5<x<1

Goal

16

Process

17

Process• Process Analysis

– Meeting Process• 75% of times, the planned time for the meetings have been exceeded.

• But, we have improved the meeting process comparing to the first cycle.

– Risk Management Process• Risk Management formally started during the 2nd cycle• Planned :Risk Meetings on every Status Meeting• Actual: Risk Meetings 50 % of times

Cycle Amount of time slipped

1st cycle 55.1%2nd cycle 25.8%

18

Development

19

Development contd. Development Report

Task Function Progress Estimate LOC Actual LOC Reuse

Req LOC counter 210 168

Req McCabe Finished the detailed design

152 N/A

Req Internal data binding Finished the detailed design

150 N/A

Req External data binding 178.5 136

Req Coupling Strength Ratio 20 32

Additional Report 50 140

Additional File Parser 120 68 Reused part

20

Support

21

Top RisksCondition Consequence Probab. Impact

We did not meet our cycle one code deliverables

We might not be able to deliver all must-have requirements at end of cycle 2.

High High

Mitigation: Review the quality plan; Increase inspections efficiency for the functionalities developed; Renegotiate scope with the client.

We will only know that we missed our quality goal at the end of cycle 2

We might miss our quality plan. Medium High

Mitigation: Change the quality plan to include ratios for the defects found in unit test and system test; this will allow us know if a code meets our quality standards before the end

We are not basing our estimations on solid data We might miss the estimates. Medium Medium

Mitigation: Use Cycle 1 data; Use Wideband Delphi; Ask instructor for information.

22

Configuration and ReuseCentral Repository - Subversion

Document and Code conventions

After Code Baseline for client delivery – only Configuration Manager is allowed to change code

PSP LOC Counter – 72 LOC

File Parser developed in the first cyle – 68 LOC

Configuration Reuse

23

Special Topic: Peer Reviews

Helped us to:Objectively understand roles’ goals Promote team jellying (candid environment)

24

Special Topic: Peer Reviews. cont

Great for constant improvement We want to get better so we measure

“You cannot improve what you cannot measure” (Rosso-Llopart, 2009)

25

Questions?

26

Backup Slides

27

Team Earned Value By Week

28

Role: Team Lead

29

Role: Process Manager

30

Process• Process Analysis

– Meeting Process• Meetings: LAUNCH, STRAT, PLANNING, Weekly STATUS• 2 of 14 meetings have no planned time for the entire project.• But, none of meetings for the 2nd cycle had no planned time. • 75% of times, the planned time for the meetings have been exceeded.• But, we have improved the meeting process comparing to the first cycle.

– Risk Management Process• Risk Management starts from the 2nd cycle.• 4 risks • Planned to have Risk Meetings after every Status Meeting, but actually have the Risk Meetings

50 % of times

Cycle Amount of time slipped

1st cycle 55.1%2nd cycle 25.8%

31

Process

• PIPs– 3 PIPs from the 1st cycle

PIP No. Problem Description Proposal Description

Status

1 It was not easy for all the team members to follow the processes exactly in the same way.

Make checklists for the inspection and the usage of SVN

Done

2 Most of defects among Document are typo, which are not actual defects.

Make sub-categorization of the defect types

Done

3 There are the duplication of the files in the subversion server.

Make the baseline of SVN

OnGoing

32

Quality Overview

• Our inspections are meeting our quality goals• Adjust quality goals according with our current

data• It’s dificult to track quality without updated

data

33

Development contd. Strategy Changes• Task planning– Adjust plan according to Cycle 1 data

• Detailed Design– Write pseudo codes in the design– Designers = implementer

• Experiments on critical functionality to design more objectively/accurately

• Alternative Strategy– McCabe: use tree parser

34