t-76.4115 iteration demo group comedia project planning iteration 19.10.2005

T-76.4115 Iteration Demo

Group CoMediaProject Planning Iteration

19.10.2005

2

T-76.4115 T-76.4115 IterationIteration demo demo

Agenda Introduction to the project ( 3 min) Project status (20 min) Risks (5 min) Work results (10 min)

Project plan Requirement specification

Used work practices (5 min) Questions and discussions (5-10 min)

Introduction to the project: CoMedia

‘Supporting Collective and Collocated Use of Contexual Media’

4


Stakeholders and Resources:

Man-hours: 150*7=1050 hours SEPAs extra hours: 20*7=140 hours Duration: 27.09.2005 – 02.03.2006 Customer: Helsinki Institute of Information

Technology Coordinator: T-76.4115 course staff Project team: seven students from HUT

5


Goals

Functionality

integrating Context Awareness in mobile group communication

Multimedia messages with sound and videos

Bluetooth network

Visual codes

Quality

Implement immediacy (instant messaging)

Interaction Design

Crossmedia: access of media also through web

Research logs

Create a system that enhances mobile media sharing with context awareness and features for collocated interaction

Create a system that is unique with no commercial or academic substitutes

Create a robust system that can be trialled in the field with at least 8 users

Status of the iteration

Project plan phase

7


Status of the iteration’s goals

Goal Status Note

project plan ok Except the QA plan due for next iteration

technical & usability requirement specification

ok Reviewed and modified by the customer

project & product name ok CoMedia

understanding the domain and context of the project

ok including concepts of context phone, group messaging

finish all deliveries for phase 1 and communicate to all the group members

Project plan OKRE specification OKProgress report OKSEPAs postponed

Not all members have decided the topics for SEPAs

8


Status of the iteration’s goalsGoal Status Note

Study related technologies and research theories

ok e.g. Bluetooth, MIDP 2.0 ,HCI, Visual codes

set up a work process for project monitoring, controlling and reporting

ok Time reporting tools (Excel)Weekly internal meetings to monitor, but so far not well practiced

task distribution and understanding roles and responsibilities in the project

Management group okBut task distribution should

have been more equal

Development group’s responsibility will be decided at the beginning of the first iteration

set up project work and communication methods and environment

ok Internal meeting-weeklyCustomer meeting-bi-weeklyEmail as major channelMSN

understanding the previous implementation related to this project

ok mGroup application studied at general level

9


Status of the iteration’s deliverables

Project plan OK, except the QA plan due as next iteration’s delivery Scheduling and task effort estimation for iteration 1&2 will be done as the

project progresses Risk log only consists of risks identified for the project planning phase, risks for

other iterations will be added later.

Requirements document Finished Detailed requirements are discussed and agreed with customer Customer has reviewed the requirement document Many requirements from different technical aspects Most of the requirements are specified May be changed later if customer have change request

Progress report OK

SEPAs Not OK. Group members have not decided on the SEPAs topics and nobody made

any plan. SEPAs will be postponed to be done in the next iteration.

10


Realization of the tasksTasks Status Real Plan Diff Reasons/Notes

Scenario and use case studies for requirement specification

ok 9 6 +3 The first draft of the scenarios were not specific enough, so it took longer time to think.

Functional requirement drafting

ok 18 8 +10 The amount of requirements from the customer is bigger than expected, Teppo stepped in to help

GUI requirement drafting

ok 8 8 0 Usability engineer has finished it.

Requirement review ok 6 6 0 Requirement specification document modified by the customer.Requirement

finalizationok 4 4 0

Adopting tools Partial 3 12 -9 Only the Lead Developer configured the server. The developers still wait for more instructions

11


Realization of the tasks (continued)Tasks Status Real Plan Diff Reasons/Notes

Domain study and documentation reading

ok 34 28 +6 These two tasks should be planned together because it is hard to divide which to study.The technology is new, so it took longer time for some developers to study it and test the phones

Technology, theory & topic study

ok

Lectures partial 24 56 -32 Lectures in Finnish, non-Finnish speaking students can’t go.Personal schedules are tight

Meetings with the customer and mentor

ok 42 42 0 One meeting with customer only management group participated. It took 2.5h.

Internal meetings ok 20 42 -22 We didn’t see the need to have more internal meetingsMaybe that’s not good

12


Realization of the tasks (continued)Tasks Status Real Plan Diff Reasons/Notes

Building a project homepage

removed 0 12 -12 WIKI will be used and it is enough

Define project goal ok 5 9 -4 The goals were clear after the scenario meeting

Other project management duties

ok 10 4 +6 Communication via emails took far more time than expected

Personal SE practices postponed 6 14 -8 Topics are not decided and only some members did some trials

Plan the next iteration

Partial 4 7 -3 Only the management group participated and more work needs to be done

Risk management ok 1 1 0 This task should be assigned more time later

Plan work methods and tools

ok 6 14 -8 We should have spent the planned amount of time, make-up needs to be done

13


Realization of the tasks (continued)Tasks Status Real Plan Diff Reasons

Project preparation/Start and organize project

ok 12 12 0

Writing/publishing meeting minutes

ok 4 4 0 Four meeting minutes uploaded to WIKI

Write progress report ok 10 6 +4 Hour reporting collecting and calculating took more time than estimated

Finalize the project plan for phase 1

ok 20 8 +12 The project took much more time than expected, especially the modification partTask to write the iteration plan was not planned, so the hours were added here.

Supporting PM for project plan phase1

ok 6 12 -6 Lead developer did not report time on this task and it took less time than planned

Demo Added 7 0 +7 Demo time has not been added in the task list

Total 259 313

14


Working hours by person

Members Real Plan Diff

Liang Fang 68 56 +12

Teppo Helles 58 52 +6

Jing Jing 52 52 0

Tomas Martelin 28 51 -23

Magnus Sandberg 18 38 -20

Lucas Vikström 15 32 -17

Di Zhu 20 32 -12

Total 259 313

15


Realized hours in I1 iteration

Real Plan DiffLiang Fang

68 56 +12

Teppo Helles

58 52 +6

Jing Jing

52 52 0

Tomas Martelin

28 51 -23

Magnus Sandberg

18 38 -20

Lucas Vikström

15 32 -17

Di Zhu

20 32 -12

Total 259 313

Hour report i ng f or PP

- 40

- 20

0

20

40

60

80

Members

Hour

Real Pl an Di ff

16


Plan in the beginning of this iteration

PP Σ I1 I2 Total

Liang Fang 56 56 34 60 150

Teppo Helles 52 52 40 58 150

Jing Jing 52 52 40 58 150

Tomas Martelin 51 51 50 49 150

Magnus Sandberg

38 38 56 56 150

Lucas Vikström 32 32 59 59 150

Di Zhu 32 32 59 59 150

Total 313 313 338 399 1050

17


Latest Plan (realized hours)PP Σ Total Left

Liang Fang 68 68 150 82

Teppo Helles 58 58 150 92

Jing Jing 52 52 150 98

Tomas Martelin 28 28 150 122

Magnus Sandberg 18 18 150 132

Lucas Vikström 15 15 150 135

Di Zhu 20 20 150 130

Total 259 259 1050 791

18


Latest Plan (realized and left hours in chart)

Ti me real i zed and t i me l ef t

68 58 5228 18 15 20

82 92 98122 132 135 130

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Li angFang

TeppoHel l es

J i ng J i ng TomasMartel i n

MagnusSandberg

LucasVi kst röm

Di Zhu

Members

Hour

PP Lef t

19


Reasons for discrepancies Tools have not been totally agreed on and adopting tools

cannot be carried out by the developers. WIKI provided by the course will be used, so no project

website is needed SEPAs topics were not discusses carefully in internal

meetings, people have not decided on their topics. Will be done as soon as the first iteration starts

Lectures are in Finnish, non-Finnish students cannot go to them all. Should not be planned as in the iteration plan. Project manager will have to be careful about that.

Demo time has not been included in the iteration tasks plan, so it was added.

Project manager is not experienced enough to write project plan and progress report, she underestimated the tasks.

20


Reasons for discrepancies Requirements eliciting and fining took longer time than

expected because it was more demanding than expected There should have been more internal meetings to agree

on the methods and tools to be used. Customer meeting for requirements scenarios was held

only 4 days before the deadline, this really stressed the planning making and also the requirements documenting.

Unequal task division has also lead to the uneven hours spent among the management team. For the development team, the saving hours will be spent in later iterations considering the demanding nature of the project.

Tasks were decided at a general level. People do not follow it.

There should have been more monitor and control actions.

21


Change to the project team structure

Our group has four members in the management team and three developers. This structure is a little bit different from the course planned structure. The reason to do this is that our project requires a lot of usability and user interface designing jobs and those jobs need to be done early in the project planning phase. One of our members Teppo Helles is a usability engineer and therefore we decided to keep him in the management group.

22


Risks

Too many features to be implemented and time might be too tight.

Customer needs to prioritize the requirements in more details, otherwise it will pose risks for the implementation iteration 1.

Developers should have spent more time on getting familiar with the tools and the previous year project. This can eat up their time in the next iteration.

Time slips and unequal division of tasks. More attention needs to be paid in the next iteration.

Communication problem exists. It takes time to read and reply emails and some misunderstandings occurred. This problem will keep on bothering us. More measures need to be taken.

Results of the iteration

Project plan Requirement Specification

Progress report

24


Project plan : Stakeholders and staffing

25


Project plan : goals and verification criteria 1

Business Goals Verification criteria

1. Create a system that enhances mobile media sharing with context awareness and features for collocated interaction

1. the system supports new practices of mobile media sharing through context awareness and features for collocated interaction

2. Create a system that is unique with no commercial or academic substitutes

2. There are no academic or commercial systems that can be considered substitutes

3. Create a robust system that can be trialled in the field with at least 8 users

3. The system can be used for a whole weekend in mobile conditions with 8 simultaneous users without breakdowns

26



Functionality Goals Verification criteria

1. To integrate context awareness capability into the application, so that people communicating in a group can see each other’s current information, such as current activity status and location.

1. The system integrates in mobile group media, context awareness cues of three types (activity in system, in the phone, the environment) successfully in a way to support new practices of mobile media sharing

2. To integrate sound and video media into the CoMedia application in order to enrich the media types besides text and pictures. These media will be used in constructing media stories shared within a group of people.

2. The system supports the creation and viewing of sound and video

3. To implement an advanced and optimized communication mechanism in sharing information utilizing both Bluetooth and telecom networks. This will not only increase the communication immediacy and efficiency, but also will be cost saving for users. A communication agent will be designed to detect the optimal mean for communication within a group

3. The collocated clients can exchange messages using bluetooth maintaing consistency of stories

4. To associate visual codes with media stories. Visual codes are like bar codes indentifying an individual media story. Visual codes provide a simple and convenient approach for other users to find out about and join other media stories inside the system. This enables users to advertise their media stories to the open public.

4. Users can assign a visual code to a story, other users can access the story with the visual code

27



Quality Goals Verification criteria

1. To Implement immediacy in sharing information as it happens, with the least amount of delay.

1. The system implements immediacy and instant messaging

2. Usability and interaction design that requires minimal input and responsiveness from the users. Yet achieving all of the defined functionalities.

2. The user is required to carry out a minimal number of interactions in each feature and the system response time are minimal

3. To implement crossmedia so that information can be: accessed from both mobile terminals and personal computers through the internet.

3. Stories are accessible through a webbrowser through a nicely designed webpage that integrates all the implemented features (sound, video, context cues)

4. To gather thorough and detailed logs of every action by the clients and server for research purposes

4. Every interaction of the user with the system is logged in a text file in the client

28


Project plan : Project resources Man-hours: 170*7=1190 hours (Incl. 150*7 for T-76.4115 and 20*7 for SEPAs)

Hardware Students’ own computers and HUT’s computers One server provided by the customer running Debian GNU/Linux Sarge Four Nokia 6630 3G phones and SIM cards as test phones provided by

customer

Software Subversion. Subversion is an open-source version control tool that is used to

check files in and out of the system. MySQL: the server application uses a MySQL database. J2ME SDK, J2SE SDK & J2EE Wireless tools from SUN Nokia series 60 emulator Bugzilla by Mozilla is going to be tested as a bug tracking tool. MS Office application for reporting and documentation Eclipse IDE Wiki Poseidon UML (Community Edition)

29


Project plan : Major phasing

Project planning phase where first deliverable version of project plan and requirements specification need to be done.

Iteration 1: Context awareness and Multimedia messages need to be implemented. Permanent media content storage needs to be implemented before iteration 2.

Iteration 2: Bluetooth short range messaging and visual codes need to be implemented.

30


Requirement Specification

Project Goals: “enriches the formats of media sharing and production with context

awareness” “handles media management and designs immediacy in

heterogeneous networks (e.g. 3G and short-range ad hoc networks)”

Functional Requirements: (39) Context awareness Additional Multimedia formats in messaging Bluetooth P2P network (data communication optimization) Visual code Permanent content storage

Non-functional Requirement: (5) Immediacy in communication Web accessibility Mininal user interaction System logging for research purpose

31


Requirement Engineering Engineering practice:

Requirement collection & understanding Brain storming – requirement classification, domain understanding, etc. Feasibility study Requirement specification (fucntional, non-functional) Requirement validation by group and customer

Activities: Two sequencial version of the system scenarios from the customer 8 internal versions of the requirement specification One discussion meeting with customer about the requirements; with our

proposed idea Customer has reviewed and validated the document One internal meeting for the group to understand the requirements

32


Used work practices

Realized practices Time reporting using Excel Meeting rhythm is set: weekly internal meetings and bi-weekly customer

meetings Communication via emails is good

To be improved: Time reporting form needs to be improved based on more personalized

tasks Time reports need to be collected every week instead of at the end of the

iteration Task estimation needs to be done in more detailed and on personal bases so

that time report can be matched with personal tasks Internal meetings shall be more organized: members shall report what they

have done at the beginning of the meeting for monitor and control MSN channel could be utilized more for some instant information flow

33


What’s next? Iteration 1:

focus on implementation tasks Concrete products at the end of Iteration 1 with required

features. Management jobs need to be improved

Major tasks coming up: Architecture design and implementation tasks division among the

developers Implementing context awareness and multimedia Implementing permanent media content storage Test plan and test cases Quality assurance plan More effective working methods and monitor and control actions SEPAs

Q & A?

Thank you!

t-76.4115 iteration demo group comedia project planning iteration 19.10.2005

Documents

project status

project work

project monitoring

customer project product

project planning phase

group members project

project management group

project okmgroup application