Course Registration System
C2 Iteration Assessment
Version 1.0
Revision History
Date |
Version |
Description |
Author |
|---|---|---|---|
|
27/March/1999 |
1.0 |
Initial Version - Assessment of second iteration C2. |
Rick Bell |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Table of Contents
1.3 Definitions, Acronyms and Abbreviations
2. Iteration Objectives Reached
4. Use Cases and Scenarios Implemented
5. Results Relative to Evaluation Criteria
Iteration Assessment
1.1 Purpose
The objective of the Iteration Assessment is to capture the result of the iteration, the degree to which the evaluation criteria were met, and lessons learned and changes to be done.
1.2 Scope
This Iteration Assessment applies to the C2 Iteration. The C2 Iteration developed the software baseline for the R1.0 Release of the C-Registration System.
The success of the C2 Iteration is measured against the evaluation criteria as outlined in the C2 Iteration Plan [7].
1.3 Definitions, Acronyms and Abbreviations
See the Glossary [3].
1.4 References
Applicable references are:
- Course Registration System Vision Document, WyIT387, V1.0, Wylie College IT.
- Course Registration System Stakeholder Requests Document, WyIT389, V1.0, 1998, Wylie College IT.
- Course Registration System Glossary, WyIT406, V1.0, 1998, Wylie College IT.
- Course Registration System Construction Phase Schedule, V1.0, 1999, Wylie College IT.
- Course Registration System Project Plan, WyIT418, V2.0, 1999, Wylie College IT.
- Course Registration System Test Plan, WyIT501, V1.0, 1999, Wylie College IT.
- Course Registration System C2 Iteration Plan, WyIT500, V1.0. 1999, Wylie College IT.
- Course Registration System C2 Integration Build Plan, WyIT502, V1.0, 1999, Wylie College IT.
- Course Registration System C2 Test Evaluation Summary, WyIT503, V1.0, 1999, Wylie College IT.
1.5 Overview
This document evaluates the iteration, summarizing the objectives which were met, how well the iteration ran according to plan. It lists the use cases and scenarios implemented.
The results are evaluated according to the criteria established for the iteration plan. Test results are referenced.
Finally, the document lists the external changes that affected the iteration, such as changes in requirements, and problem areas that require future rework.
The C2 Iteration developed the software baseline for R1.0. By most measures the iteration succeeded in meeting its objectives. However, difficulties in solving the performance problems (as outlined in the Test Evaluation Report [9] have resulted in a decision to add one additional iteration to redesign the interface to the Course Catalog System.
Senior management and the Wylie College representative did not approve the release of R1.0 and recommended an additional iteration to redesign the interface with the Course Catalog System.
The iteration executed according to plan completing on schedule.
The original budget of $116,600 for the C2 Iteration was overrun by $10,000 due to additional effort being deployed to address the performance issues.
No new use cases or scenarios were developed for the C2 Iteration. Defects identified in the Beta Release were resolved. The menu and screen layouts were redesigned following user feedback on the Beta Release.
The following table lists the iteration evaluation criteria (as outlined in the C2 Iteration Plan [7]) and comments on how well the criteria for success were met.
Failure of the loading tests to meet the performance requirements has resulted in the decision to add one more iteration prior to R1.0 Release.
|
Evaluation Criteria |
Iteration Results |
|---|---|
|
All critical, high, and medium priority defects discovered in the Beta Release (from C1 Iteration) must be resolved. |
All defects (medium, high, or critical severity) identified in the Beta release were resolved, with the exception of the performance-related defects. |
|
All user feedback from the Beta Release must be evaluated. All feedback classified as "major" must be resolved. All use cases and requirements targeted for Release 1 must be implemented and tested. |
User feedback from the Beta Release was evaluated. Feedback comments classified as "major" were resolved. All use cases and requirements targeted for Release 1 were implemented. |
|
All timing, performance, and quality requirements, as specified in the Supplementary Specification, must be met. |
The loading and performance requirements that involved accessing the Course Catalog System were not satisfied in the R1 tests. |
|
The Tests, as defined in the Test Plan [6], must be executed. |
All tests defined in the Test Plan [6] and Test Suite were executed. The 10 test cases dependent upon the Load Simulator were executed independently following System Test and passed. |
|
All test results must be reviewed. |
The Test Manager reviewed all test results. |
|
The senior management team and the Wylie College representative must approve the release of the R1.0 software baseline. |
Senior Management and the Wylie College representative did not approve the release of R1.0 software. One more iteration is being planned to redesign the Course Catalog System interface and resolve the performance problems. |
The Test Results are filed in the Configuration Management Library. Refer to the C2 Test Evaluation Report [9] for a summary of the test results and an evaluation of the test measurements.
The C2 Iteration responded to the user feedback from the Beta Release. The menu and screen layouts were all redesigned due to an overwhelming dissatisfaction with the user interface. The new design has been previewed by a selected group of users and has met their approval. This engineering change was deemed as "in scope" and no Change Orders were necessary.
As summarized in Section 4, an additional iteration has now been added to the schedule. This iteration will redesign the interface components and thoroughly test the system response under various load conditions.
Response times to retrieve or deposit records from the Course Catalog System will be measured under the following types of conditions: