DOCVIEWER

EPP | 10th December 2009 | IKARUPROJECTS

DOCVIEWER

AGENDA

Introduction

Recap

Architecture and Design

Demo

Planning and Tracking

Reflection

TEAM IGREEN2

INTRODUCTIONS

Client

Bharat Gorantla

Mentor

Phil Bianco

Team iGreen

Sai Sharan Donthi

Vignesh Murugesan

Vikram Subramanian

TEAM IGREEN3

PROJECT CONTEXT

TEAM IGREEN4

Learner Teacher

PDF

DOC

PPT

ODT

Microsoft Office, Adobe Reader, Open

Office, ??

Internet

Data Transfer

TEAM IGREEN5

CONTEXT DIAGRAM

Viewer

Converter

Web Application

Developed by Team iGreen Client Application

Legend

Uses

Overview

Architecture

Planning

and Estimation

Reflections

Next

Step

C&C VIEW

TEAM IGREEN6Ove

rview

Architecture

Planning

and Estimation

Reflections

Next

Step

VIEWER DESIGN

TEAM IGREEN7

Spoke indicates a new screen

ACCOMPLISHMENTS

Deliverables:

TEAM IGREEN8

TEAM IGREEN8

Converter Viewer

ZOOM

Search

Pagination

Full-screen

‘Must Have’s

Deliv

ered

Team iGreen | Phil Bianco | DocViewer | IKaruProjects

DOCVIEWER - DEMO

TEAM IGREEN 9

RECAP– SUMMER OF ‘09

SOW, SRS |Quality Attribute Workshop Scope | Clarity between technical constraints and QA’s.

Extreme Programming Spike Solutions

Test Driven Development

Quality Assurance

Earned Value Planning and Tracking Plan revision | Team velocity

TEAM IGREEN10 - Went well | - Satisfactory | - Didn’t go well

GOALS AND OBJECTIVES – FALL ‘09

Pair Programming

Continuous Risk Management

Process for Quality Assurance

Deliver the must have requirements Deliver Word (doc, docx), PowerPoint (ppt, pptx)

Deliver the viewer part developed using FLEX

TEAM IGREEN11

SDLC & PROCESS

Extreme Programming Iterative delivery | Two semesters | Small Team

Project Characteristics

Selected Agile Life Cycle Model.

Frequent delivery & continuous client interaction

Short span of the project

Small Team

Possibility of changes in requirements

TEAM IGREEN12

SDLC & PROCESS

XP continued….

Paired comparison - Estimation

Risk Management | CRM | SRE

Risk Identification – At the beginning of Iteration

Risk mitigation strategies | Contingency plans immediately

TEAM IGREEN13

PLANNING AND ESTIMATION DATA

Planning Data

Available Number of Hours : 470 hrs

Number of hours planned for : 485 hrs

Number of hours kept in Buffer : 134 hrs

Number of iterations : 4

3 Iterations for ‘Must have’s and 1 Iteration for ‘Nice to have’

TEAM IGREEN14

ITR - 1

CPV VS. EV AND ACTUAL EFFORT

TEAM IGREEN15

Weeks

SOWSRS

SAD

Iteration 1Iteration 2

Iteration 3Iteration 4

Deployment

SRS & SOW

SADIteration 1

Planned

Achieved1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

CPV

30 129 200 274 324 398 464 500 545 581 618 636 660 706.5

733 782 817 835.5

885 914 935

CAH

30 129 156.5

202.5

261.5

329.5

378 417.5

444.5

476.5

510.5

519.5

534.5

557.5

579 594 630 675 729 786 807

CEV

30 129 174 232 297 364 439 507 544.5

585 636 663 696 714 757.5

799.5

810 823.5

842.5

868 881.5

50

150

250

350

450

550

650

750

850

950

Planned Value Vs Earned Value Vs Actual Effort

Effor

t/Va

lue

in H

ours

ITERATION 1 EV ANALYSIS

TEAM IGREEN16

Backlog - Iteration 2

Buffer completely

utilized

7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

CPV

545 581 618 636 660 706.5

733 782 817 835.5

885 914 935 NaN NaN

CAH 473 505 539 548 563 586 607.5

622.5

658.5

703.5

757.5

814.5

835.5

NaN NaN

CEV 544.5

585 636 663 696 714 757.5

799.5

810 823.5

842.5

868 881.5

NaN NaN

450

550

650

750

850

950

Fall of '09

Valu

e /

Effor

t in

Hou

rs

Backlog – Iteration 3

ESTIMATED EFFORT SPLIT-UP

TEAM IGREEN17

Week 9; 37

Week 10; 18

Week 11; 24

Week 12; 46.5

Week 13; 26.5

Week 14; 49Week 15; 35

Week 16; 18.5

Week 17; 49.5

Week 18; 29

Week 19; 21

Week 20; 27

Estimated_in_week (in hours)

EFFORT SPENT - ACTIVITIES

TEAM IGREEN18

Backlog list - Iteration 3; 24

Bug tracking ; 30

Configuration Management; 5

Deployment and Signoff; 3

Design; 18

Detailed requirement; 33

Development; 118.5Fixing team dynamics; 19.5

Internal Training plan; 19.5

Iteration Planning; 44.5

Project postmortem; 15

Risk management ; 15

Unplanned Activities; 32.5

Effort Spent on Activity

REFLECTIONS – PLANNING AND TRACKING

Finding algorithms is not easy Planned for 2 Converter POCs | Performed five

Four converter POCs | One Viewer POC

Planned only 2 POCs - Should have kept it open Plan revision | 09/11

Reprioritization from client - Could have asked earlier Plan revision | 10/10

TEAM IGREEN19

- Satisfactory | - Went well | - Didn’t go well

REFLECTIONS - PROOF OF CONCEPTS

Approach Architecture Business Constraint

Technical Constraint

Functional Requirement

Apache POI & iText API

JOD Converter with Open Office SDK

Publishor 6

Flash 8

SWF2 to SWF3 Converter

TEAM IGREEN20

CLIENT FEEDBACK

TEAM IGREEN211- Can Improve 2-Matched Expectations 3-Exceeded Expectations

Deliverable Rating

Converter API

Flash Viewer

Documented API

Software Architecture and Design Document

Proof Of Concepts Document

THANK YOU

TEAM IGREEN 22

BACK UP SLIDES

Back Up Slides

TEAM IGREEN23

TEAM IGREEN 24

Architecture

DOCUMENT FORMATS Adobe PDF

Microsoft Word – doc & docx

Microsoft Powerpoint – ppt & pptx

Open Office Text Document - .odt & .sxw

Open Office Presentation - .odp & .sxi

Adobe Postscript

Microsoft Excel

Open Office Spreadsheet

Plain Text

Rich Text FormatTEAM IGREEN

25

FUNCTIONAL REQUIREMENTS & QAS

TEAM IGREEN26

Converter

Performance – Priority 1

Extensibility – Priority 2

A 2MB File should be converted within 10 seconds

A newly developed document converter should be integrated in to the converter component within 40 person days .

CONSTRAINTS

Technical

Should be provided as an API to hook in to the client web application.

Should be developed using Java.

Business

Should be developed only using open source tools.

Should be developed in two semesters.

TEAM IGREEN27

C&C VIEW

TEAM IGREEN28

C&C VIEW

TEAM IGREEN29

REQUIREMENTS

TEAM IGREEN30

REQUIREMENTS ENGINEERING

Requirements Development

Functional User Quality Attributes Technical

Business

Requirements Analysis

Prioritization of

Features Quality Attributes

Must Haves and Nice to Haves

Requirements Specification

IEEE SRS Format

Use cases for functional requirements

6 part scenario documentation for quality attributes

TEAM IGREEN31

Beware! So much of numbers

PLANNING AND TRACKING

TEAM IGREEN 32

ITERATIONS AND FEATURES

Iteration 1 Features Priority

1. Converter API,PDF Converter - pdfDocumented APIViewer Prototype

C1V1

2 Word Converter – doc, docxDocumented APISearch, Copy functionality, Pagination

C2V2

3. PowerPoint – ppt, pptxDocumented APIZoom, Full screen mode

C3V3

4. Excel, PS – xls, xlsxPrint, download

C4 – Nice to haveV4 – Nice to have

TEAM IGREEN34

PLANNED EFFORT FOR PHASES

TEAM IGREEN35

Architecture; 125; 17%

Deployment; 12; 2%

Iteration - 1; 91; 12%

Iteration - 2; 65.5; 9%

Iteration - 3; 73.5; 10%

Iteration - 4; 124.5; 17%

Project Overheads; 111; 15%

Release Planning; 51.75; 7%

Requirements_Analysis; 89.25; 12%Effort per phase

EFFORT SPENT ON PHASES

TEAM IGREEN36

Architecture; 125; 17%

Deployment; 12; 2%

Iteration - 1; 91; 12%

Iteration - 2; 65.5; 9%

Iteration - 3; 73.5; 10%

Iteration - 4; 124.5; 17%

Project Overheads; 111; 15%

Release Planning; 51.75; 7%

Requirements_Analysis; 89.25; 12%Effort per phase (hrs, percentage)

EFFORT SPLIT IN ITERATION 2

TEAM IGREEN37

Bug tracking ; 19.5; 23%

Design; 12; 14%

Detailed requirement; 10.5; 12%

Development; 40.5; 48%

Iteration Planning; 2.5; 3%

Effort spent on Activities (hrs, percentage)

EFFORT SPLIT FOR ITERATION 3

TEAM IGREEN38

Design; 4.5; 6%Detailed requirement;

9; 12%

Development; 18; 24%

Internal Training plan; 19.5; 27%


Effort spent per activity (hrs, percentage)

EFFORT SPENT SPLIT – ITERATION 4

TEAM IGREEN39

Bug tracking ; 10.5; 8%

Design; 1.5; 1%

Detailed requirement; 13.5; 11%

Development; 79.5; 64%


Effort Spent Splitup

REFLECTIONS -REQUIREMENTS

Quality Attributes

Client was familiar with Quality Attribute Workshop, so we could directly start from Business Goals

Scenario Brainstorming

Scenario Consolidation, Prioritization and Refinement

Identifying the system boundary and scope.

Clarity between technical constraints and quality attributes

TEAM IGREEN40

- Satisfactory | - Went well | - Didn’t go well

PROCESS MATRIXProcess - Feature Matrix Process

TSP XP OpenUP Scrum

Features

Documentation Level 1 3 3 3

Team Size 3 3 3 2

Product size and complexity 1 3 2 3

Requirements stability 1 3 3 3

Technical skills 2 3 2 1

New process adoption 1 3 3 2

Requirements traceability 3 3 2 2

Risk management 3 3 3 3

Architecture centric 3 2 3 2

Roles and Responsibilities 3 3 3 2

Frequency of deliverables 3 3 3 3

Customer involvement 2 3 2 3

Total 18 35 32 29

LegendsReference: Choosing your weapon wisely, Justinr Rockwood, Carnegie Mellon Univerisity 3 Best suited

2 Push

1 Not suited

TEAM IGREEN41

PROCESS

TEAM IGREEN42

Extreme Programming Process Followed

Planning Game - Release Plan and Iteration Plan

Release Plan and Iteration Plan

User Stories Features and Use Cases

Simple Design Architecture

Iteration•Plan•Estimate•Design•Test Driven Development•Acceptance Test

Iteration•Plan•Estimate•High Level Design•Low Level Design•Test Driven Development•API Documentation•Acceptance Test•Backlog list

ARCHITECTURE DESIGN PROCESS

TEAM IGREEN43

Gather Architectural Drivers

Identify Notional Architecture

Apply ADD and Refine Architecture

Develop Run-Time, Static and Allocation views

Review Architecture

Activities

Legend

Control Flow

MODULE & PACKAGE VIEW

TEAM IGREEN44

ALLOCATION VIEW

TEAM IGREEN45

IMPLEMENTATION

Low – Level Design

Test Driven Development

TEAM IGREEN46

PROJECT MANAGEMENT

People

Project Plan

Tracking and Revising Plan

Risk Management

Reflections

TEAM IGREEN47

WHAT NOW?

Analyze why the Earned Value is more/less

Productivity | Estimation | Process

Activities that have not added value but consumed effort

Backlog List | Buffer Time | Allocation | Time-box

Update the Project Overhead Activities / Tasks

Estimate and revise plan

Steps to achieve productivity

Training | CPI| Evaluation | Feedback

TEAM IGREEN48

Vikram Subramanian

Or time for NICE TO HAVE Items

PROJECT PLAN

Planning Process

Interim plan initially

Quickly develop the MACRO plan

Delphi Estimation Method Activities | ‘Expert’ Opinion | Consensus

“Granularized” Activities and Tasks for Tracking

Release Plan & Iterations Plan - Deliverable based Planning Requirements | Iterations | Plan

TEAM IGREEN49

RISKS

Risk1

Condition: Team Not comfortable with flex.

Consequence: The team is still learning itMight not be able to estimate and not deliver certain components on time.

Risk2

Condition: Configuration of the server machine where the client application runs is not elicited

Consequence: The performance of the converter might not satisfy the performance

TEAM IGREEN51

WIDE BAND DELPHI

Architecture

Estimated – 71 hours

Actual – 125 hours

Iteration 1

Estimated – 190 hours

Actual – 94 hours

TEAM IGREEN52

ITERATION VALUE

Iteration 1 – 45%

Iteration 2 and 3 will achieve 55%

TEAM IGREEN53

ASSUMPTIONS

If the POC is successful for word, is successful for PPT too.

TEAM IGREEN54

ITERATIONS BACKLOG LIST

Iteration – 2

Risk Management - SRE | Mitigation | Contingency Plans

Algorithms not finalized yet

Bug tracking system not in place

Full screen feature not tested

Iteration – 3

POCs not completed yet – OpenOffice SDK didn’t work

SWF file still not converted into flash video

Framing doesn’t work right now Pagination | Search – not completed

TEAM IGREEN55

DOCVIEWER

Documents

Transcript of DOCVIEWER