“Kuality” Assurance What does that look like? Scott Heise Indiana University KFS - Quality Assurance Manager Paul Sandoval University of Arizona KRA –

“Kuality” Assurance

What does that look like?

Scott Heise Indiana University KFS - Quality Assurance Manager

Paul Sandoval University of Arizona KRA – Lead Testing Coordinator

Kenton Hensley Cornell University KRA – Lead Business Analyst

Scott Heise

Indiana University

Kuali Financial System

(KFS)

Quality Assurance Manager

“Kuality” Assurance

Functional Specifications

Application Development

Open Source License

Requirements

Accessibility Guidelines

Kuali Architecture/Standards

Unit TestCreation

Automated Unit Testing

Code ReviewOpen Source

License ReviewFunctional/

Regression Testing

Integration Testing

ModuleSign-off

Accessibility Review

Performance Testing

Functional Test Plan



Application DevelopmentUnit TestCreation


ModuleSign-off

Manual Testing



Functional/Regression Testing

Integration Testing

ModuleSign-off


Testing


Application DevelopmentUnit TestCreation



Integration Testing

ModuleSign-off


Code Review



Code Review

ModuleSign-off




ModuleSign-off


License Review


Open Source License

Requirements

Open Source License Review

ModuleSign-off

Quality Assurance Framework



Open Source License

Requirements



Unit TestCreation


Code ReviewOpen Source

License ReviewFunctional/

Regression Testing

Integration Testing

ModuleSign-off


Performance Testing


License Review


Open Source License

Requirements

Open Source License Review

ModuleSign-off

Licensing

• Software distribution licensing– Open Source Initiative (OSI)

Educational Community License 1.0 (ECL)• Original code

– Individual Contributor License Agreements (CLAs)– Corporate Contributor License Agreements (CCLAs)– © Labeling the code

• Third-Party code– ECL-Compatible License– Follow license requirements– Acknowledgments– License folder

Usability – Before Coding

• Indiana UXG – Usability Group– Developed Standards/Guidelines for the UI– Initial Mocks reviewed by Kuali Financial

Functional Council• Decisions made:

– Editable data entry lines– Page Level Help – no field level help

– Usability sessions with users from each school via Breeze

Usability – During/After

• Marked as Usability

• Reviewed and Prioritized by Usability Prioritization Committee

• Usability Dev team formed during QA

• Usability issues that affect infrastructure, reviewed and time allocated during next release, e.g. – error handling framework




ModuleSign-off


Accessibility

• Guidelines

• Test by sampling

• “Issues” approach to resolution

Paul Sandoval

University of Arizona

Kuali Research Administration System

(KRA)

Lead Testing Coordinator

KFS Testing




Integration Testing

ModuleSign-off


KFS TeamOrganization Board

Project ManagerFunctional Council Technical Council

LeadSubject Matter

Expert

Business Analyst

DevelopmentManager

Subject Matter

ExpertsDevelopers

Partner Institution

- - - -

Lead Architect

Testing Coordinator

Quality Assurance Manager

TestingTeam

Module Team

ProjectAnalyst

LeadDeveloper

Testing Coordinator

Subject Matter

ExpertsDevelopers

Partner Institution

TestingTeam

ConfigurationManager

Testing Structure

• Testing Teams– One per module– Module Testing Coordinator

• Write/assign scenarios to testers• Train testers on Kuali, Confluence, JIRA• Review Bugs: Duplicate? Training? Usability?

– Testers from all schools – 15 plus/module

• KFS Testing Coordinator– Monitors issues application wide– Assists Module TCs

Process

• eDoc/process ready for testing

• Scenario created/assigned – JIRA

• Bugs reported in JIRA

• Issues fixed marked as resolved

• Testing environment released weekly

• Release notes created - Confluence

• Testers test close/reopen

• Rinse and Repeat!

Tools - JIRA

Tools - Confluence

Lessons Learned

• Face to Face sessions

• Never too many testers

• Training for testers

• Pre-Testing to ensure a fairly stable environment

• Weekly meetings with testers

• Testing is the BEST way to learn!

KRA

Testing and Usability

Process

• Functional Specs (SMEs)

• Code (Developers)

• Testing (Developers, Lead Testing Coordinator, Module Testing Coordinator, SMEs, Testers – includes Coeus consortium members)

Testing

• Module Testing Coordinators– One per module– Write/assign scenarios to testers from each

school in JIRA– Train testers

• Testers test – report bugs in JIRA

• Module Testing Coordinators review– Bug, Duplicate, Training opp, Usability

Bugs

• Reported in JIRA

• Fixed by Developers

• Resolved with next Build

• Confluence used to help testers keep track of resolved bugs ready to be tested

• Testers Test – Close/Reopen

Lessons Learned

• One person was designated to write Spec Docs in the SME group in KFS. In KRA, everyone is taking an active role in writing Spec Docs. This promotes ownership in the process!!

• SME Members are going to take a more active role in testing.

• Face to Face testing – Training

KRA

Quality, Timelines and Synergy

Can these work together?

QA is Continuous!

• QA exists throughout the entire software development life cycle!

– Planning and Communication Tools• Microsoft Project, Confluence and Jira, Breeze,

Skype, Face-to-face meetings – Analysis

• Functional and Technical– Licensing– Coding

• Code Reviews, Development Standards

QA is Continuous!

– Testing• Unit Testing, Regression Testing, Integration Testing

– Usability and Accessibility• HTML Mock Development, Focus Groups, Design

Critiques, W3C Priorities, Accessibility Testing

– Documentation• Functional and Technical

– Builds and Releases

Timelines

QA impacts Timelines

• Project planning is continuous along with QA• Coeus represents the base functionality that will be

delivered in KRA• Enhancements are reviewed, estimated and submitted

for functional approval. If accepted, the project plan is adjusted.

• Functional specifications are standard• SME groups follow similar processes when interacting

with SME group members and the development team• A user interface group monitors HTML mock

development and usability/accessibility issues

QA impacts Timelines

• Focus groups and design critiques are conducted with Faculty and staff roles across multiple schools

• HTML mocks and jsps are validated for W3C Priority 1 and 2 issues and corrected

• Code reviews are standard and code is reviewed weekly• Unit testing is standard and a continuous test process

runs daily• Multiple test environments exist to ensure that

automated and manual testing is performed• Documentation is standard – functional specifications,

technical gap documents, integration documents, user and help documents

Lessons Learned

• Developers should test the web application on a regular basis

• Code should be reviewed as functionality is developed and a final code review should be required for completion

• Unit Testing guidelines should be set early and followed• Functional testers should test functionality as early as

possible• Project team members must embrace QA processes• Coeus participation is essential! Coeus documentation

is essential

“Kuality” Conclusions

• QA exists throughout the software development life cycle

• While processes may vary between projects, the goal is to ensure that the software is built in a timely manner and meets specified functional requirements

• Reviewing and making changes based upon lessons learned can improve the project

Questions?

Contacts

Please feel free to contact the following individuals about the KFS, KRA or Coeus projects:

• Jim Thomas, Project ManagerIndiana University – [email protected]

• Andy Slusar, Senior Project ManagerCornell University – [email protected]

Documents

“Kuality” Assurance What does that look like? Scott Heise Indiana University KFS - Quality Assurance Manager Paul Sandoval University of Arizona KRA –