Difference between revisions of "IS480 Team wiki: 2012T2 box.us Final"
Qyang.2010 (talk | contribs) |
Qyang.2010 (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 333: | Line 333: | ||
− | |rowspan=" | + | |rowspan="3"| Usability Testing |
|| User Testing 1 Test Plans | || User Testing 1 Test Plans | ||
|| [https://wiki.smu.edu.sg/is480/IS480_Team_wiki:_2012T2_box.us_Test_Plans#User_Test_1 Test Plans used] | || [https://wiki.smu.edu.sg/is480/IS480_Team_wiki:_2012T2_box.us_Test_Plans#User_Test_1 Test Plans used] | ||
Line 346: | Line 346: | ||
|- | |- | ||
+ | |rowspan="2"| Software Testing | ||
|| Integration Testing | || Integration Testing | ||
|| [https://wiki.smu.edu.sg/is480/IS480_Team_wiki:_2012T2_box.us_Test_Plans#Integration_Testing Integration Testings] | || [https://wiki.smu.edu.sg/is480/IS480_Team_wiki:_2012T2_box.us_Test_Plans#Integration_Testing Integration Testings] |
Revision as of 12:45, 21 April 2013
HOME | PROJECT OVERVIEW | PROJECT MANAGEMENT | DOCUMENTATION |
Contents
Project Progress Summary
What Is This Project About?
Check out our 1 min ++ video pitch to find out what this project is about at Youtube
Quick Links
Final Presentation Slides: coming soonDeployed Site: Empact ACTDemonstration Site: Empact ACT(Staging)Initial Proposal: Proposal |
---|
Project Highlights:
Managing the Great Amount of Issues being Highlighted during Deployment
|
Volunteers did not find language in the system friendly
|
Addition of 2 functionalities
|
Project Challenges:
Gathering Requirements from Empact
How we Managed
|
Dealing with Changes
|
Project Management
Project Scope:
Change | Change Description |
---|---|
1 |
Notification
|
Project Schedule (Plan Vs Actual):
Project Metrics:
BUG METRICS
- Bug Score: Bug Metric on Google Docs
- Bug Log: Bug Log on Google Docs
- Explanation of Bug Tracking: Bug Metrics
Iteration | Bug Score | Any Actions Taken |
---|---|---|
11 | 31 |
Increase in Bug Score due to bugs that were recorded from User Testing 2
|
12 | 16 |
New features of the system(Statistics, Dashboard and Notifications) were being released
|
13 | 58 |
More thorough testing was being performed for the UAT
|
SCHEDULE METRICS
- Schedule: Schedule on Google Docs
Handing Over
Deployment Testing
We release 4 versions of the system on the live environment before going entering the User Acceptance Test. Our purpose for deployment testing was to determine what are the issues that would arise from using the application in the actual conditions in varied browsers and system settings. Additionally, we also collected suggestions from the users in order to make further improvements to the application. In deploying the application, we followed the following process:
Date | Description | Features Released |
---|---|---|
11/03/2013 |
Release 0.1 |
|
18/03/2013 |
Release 0.2 |
|
25/03/2013 |
Release 0.3 |
|
04/04/2013 |
Release 0.4 |
|
04/04/2013 |
Release 0.5 |
|
User Acceptance Test
We conducted our User Acceptance Test on 05/04/2013 at the Empact office. A final verification was made concerning all the issues and defects that were being raised during the UAT. on the following week at the 12/04/2013.
- Note: BA refers to the facilitators in the UAT test
- All defects are highlighted onto a separate issue list.
- The list is collated and sent to Empact to prioritise based on issues.
- Bugs are fixed immediately
Recording Issues
Issues are recorded in a separate issue list on Google Docs
Quality of product
Project Deliverables:
List the artifacts produced for this project. The entire deliverable can be submitted in a separate thumb drive, web repository or place in the IS480 team wiki.
Stage | Specification | Modules |
---|---|---|
Project Management | Minutes | Meeting Minutes |
Metrics | Bug metrics | |
Requirements | Paper Prototypes | Paper Prototypes |
Analysis | Use case | Use Case Diagram |
Business Process Diagram | Process Diagrams | |
Screen Shots | All Screenshots | |
Design | ERD Diagrams | V1,V2,V3,V4,V5 |
Usability Testing | User Testing 1 Test Plans | Test Plans used |
User Testing 2 Test Plans | Test Plans used | |
Heuristic Evaluation User Scenarios | User Scenarios used | |
Software Testing | Integration Testing | Integration Testings |
Deployment Testing | Deployment Testing | |
Handover | Manuals | User tutorial, Developer manual, Setup manual |
Code | client server | |
Deployment Diagram | instructions |
Not all parts of the deliverables are necessary but the evidence should be convincing of the scope.
User Testing 2
Deployment Testing:
Release 0.1 |
---|
Key Changes
|
Feedback Collected
|
Release 0.2 |
---|
Key Changes
|
Feedback Collected
|
Release 0.3 |
---|
Key Changes
|
Feedback Collected
|
Release 0.4 |
---|
Key Changes
|
Feedback Collected
|
Release 0.5 |
---|
Key Changes
|
Feedback Collected
|
Testing:
User Testing | Integration Testing | Deployment Testing |
---|---|---|
Objective: To collect feedback concerning usability of our application | Objective: To test the quality of our application | Objective: To collect feedback when application is being used in live environments |
When: | When: | When: |
How: | How: | How: |
Findings: | Findings: | Findings: |
Reflection
Team Reflection:
- Managing client expectations
- Learning to collaborate more effectively in a team
- Leveraging one another's strength and weaknesses
- Being a good team player within the team
- Learning to have fun as a team!
- Our IS modules have helped to prepare us for the demands of an IT project
Individual Reflection:
Kevin
As I review through my initial learning outcomes that I set out to learn, I felt that I have managed to meet these outcomes in the following way:
- Motivating IT Project teams: Bringing together people from different walks of life together to work on an IT project has sharpened my skills in handling with people and being more cognisant of people management issues and how to deal with group cultures and team norms
- Evaluating IT project ideas: FYP has taught me how to be aware of what are the current issues facing IT projects. It has taught me how to evaluate these and adopt a T-model by being able to think about what are the broad issues that are going to affect IT decisions and what are the deep issues that are specific to the issue being raised.
- Time Management Skills: FYP has taught me to be aware of the time that I spend managing the team, managing my own workload within the team and juggling my workload with my other modules that I was taking in school.
- Client Negotiation skills: I was able to apply the negotiation skills that I learnt from a module to achieve integrative outcomes for the client and the team, and what are the tactics that are readily available to deal with such situations.
- Applied Project Management Skills: The FYP experience has been an extension of what I have learnt in Software Engineering and I was able to refine my skills in scope management, schedule management and further extend the practicality of metrics being used within a project.
Sponsor Comment:
Sometimes, the client writes a report to feedback on the system; this sponsor report can be included or linked from here.