PROJECT SECME

Project Legacy

EEL5881 SOFTWARE ENGINEERING FALL 2002

 

Modification history:

Version

Date

Who

Comment

v0.0

08/15/00

G. H. Walton

Template

v1.0

09/29/02

Carthik Sharma

Initial version

 

Team Name: TEAM SECME

Team Members:


Contents of this Document

Roles

Analysis

 


Roles :

Project Artifacts / Tasks

Carthik A Sharma

Juan C Vivanco

Majid Ali Khan

Santhosh K Grandai

Requirements Specification

5%

 

90%

5%

Website Maintenance

70%

10%

10%

10%

Concept of Operations

80%

 

20%

 

Test Plan

50%

 

 

50%

Project Management Plan

 

 

40%

60%

Use Case Descriptions

20%

40%

20%

20%

High Level Design

 

 

100%

 

Design Issues

20%

80%

 

 

ER Model Design

 

 

10%

90%

Detailed Design

40%

 

30%

30%

Class Diagrams

 

 

100%

 

User’s Manual

 

100%

 

 

Project Legacy

100%

 

 

 

Coding

10%

20%

50%

20%


Analysis :

1.        Quality of the final product

·         The product meets most of the essential requirements.

·         Some of the more complex use cases have not been implemented in full, and are left for the maintenance phase.

·         The user can retrieve the data stored in the database in an error free fashion.

·         The security is of the required quality , with a proper sign-in sign-out system.

·         The documentation and the User’s Manual have been thoroughly checked for consistency.

·         The different phases in the documents, the design, and the decisions taken, as well as the source code is included for the ease of maintenance.

 

2.        Recommended use of the final product

·         The product should be run by the end users on a Pentium or equivalent PC with minimum 64 MB RAM, with Internet Explorer 5.0 or higher.

·         The server which hosts the product should have Tomcat server, version 3.3 or higher installed in it, with Internet explorer 5.0 or higher, JDK 1.2 or higher, with full support to debug and maintain Java Beans and JavaServer Pages. The server should also have Microsoft Access installed on it.

·         The users should follow the User’s Manual for realizing the full potential of the product, and they are expected to have an awareness of the scope of the product. The product functions best when the input format is adhered to strictly.

·         The maintainers should be able to use Jbuilder 4.0 or  Visual J++ to debug the faults that may arise later, during maintenance.

·         The product will function best if the data in the tables is not altered other than by using the product. However the end users are expected to contact the maintenance team for resolution of any technical difficulties. None of the product’s functions can be altered by the end user.

 

3.        Known Problems

·         Some parts of the requirements have not been met in full. This is not expected to affect the normal operation of the other functionalities.

·         The end user has to take the help of the support team to edit the names of the events in the annual competition, as also the number of events each year.

 

4.        Adherence to  Project Plan

·         Lack of planning would have been disastrous to the project, the deadlines, and the expected completion dates of modules and tasks was adhered to, and this helped in the proper progress of the project. This would not have been possible without the plan.

·         The plan for the deliverables to the instructor was strictly adhered to, as were the plans for design and documentation.

·         The team tried to adhere to the project plan as much as possible, however, due to the fact that this is a first time project for the members, certain problems were faced, and the team had to adapt to the situation

·         In the implementation phase, two two-member groups were formed for programming in tandem. This was not envisaged in the original plan.

·         In retrospect, the time analysis seems to be skewed, since as the project grew, the size grew considerably, and the increased complexity led to the fact that not all the issues could be addressed in the limited time.

·         The scope of the project turned out to be more than that estimated, and the work loads on the team members had to be augmented when compared to the plan.

 

5.        Defect Analysis

·         The defects in the requirements, though minor were addressed early in the project.

·         Certain critical defects in the design, such as the absence of a particular entry in the table, were dealt with on a immediate basis, and the design was suitably changed to accommodate the limitations.

 

6.        Quality Assurance

·         The implemented functions of the product meet all the quality requirements specified in the quality requirements.

·         Proper adherence to the User’s Manual and Build Instructions will ensure an error free operation of the functions.

·         The functions that have not been implemented to the fullest are still functional to a certain extent of reliability in some cases.

·         Acute shortage of time in developing the product led to very fast testing.

·         The test plan developed to meet the artifact submission deadline alone was seen to be insufficient, which is understandable since upon development of the product, greater insight was gained onto what situations and combinations could possibly lead to an error.

·         The test cases could have been defined using statistical methods, but since knowledge about such methods was lacking in the beginning, this was not done.

 

7.        Configuration Management

·         Team members were assigned tasks to develop the various artifacts, and the other team members then reviewed the developed artifacts.

·         The most recent and correct version of the artifacts was always maintained on the website.

·         However, the classes, methods and JSP pages were reviewed and rewritten during implementation. The configuration of these elements were kept track of by the member in charge of the particular class/use case.

·         The most recent configuration was always available in the computer used for development (in lab 257)

 

8.        Suggestions for the future

·         Proper and adequate exposure to the programming language and the technology used significantly reduces development time. One should never attempt a project without the requisite skills, as this adds the time taken to become comfortable with the specific language to the product development time.

·         The team leader should be the person with the most experience in the technology used, since this leads to the leader being able to estimate the difficulty of task in advance, and thus ensuring that only those responsibilities are assumed that can be completed in the allotted time.

·         The time for the project was highly insufficient, this points to the importance of using a proper scheduling tool to estimate the time required to complete the project. However, since this was the first project for the inexperienced team members, the proper time estimation was not done, and this lead to a lot of problems later in the project.

·         The task of creating documents was delegated to individuals and this turned out to be an efficient method , when compared to a group working on a document, as happened with the class specifications.

·         The product can be augmented easily with the source code and the design documents being available. More SQL queries can be written and implemented for a wider choice of queries.


Template created by G. Walton (GWalton@mail.ucf.edu) on March 28, 1999 and last modified on August 15, 2000.

This page last modified by Carthik A. Sharma(appcash@yahoo.com ) on November 14, 2002