Epf Format in Excel Current by cyu28267

VIEWS: 295 PAGES: 30

More Info
									                        Life Cycle Plan (LCP)


                   ECLIPSE-BASED COCOMO II

                                  Team number 12
            Alexander Mathew                       Project Manager, Prototype
               Girija Goleria                            Life Cycle Plan
              Pawan Chandak                      Operational Concept Description
             Gaurav Badlaney               System & Software Architecture Description
             Bankim Bhalaria               System & Software Requirements Description
                Tanya Jacob                           Feasibility Rationale
         Christopher Higginbotham                            IV & V
              Michael Medved                                 IV & V




f93cde67-93d7-4256-8bf8-206c68c9864b.doc                        Version Date: 12/02/06
Life Cycle Plan (LCP)                                                                Version no 1.6



Version History
Date           Author         Vers    Changes made                 Rationale
                              ion
10/06/06       Girija         1.0     Original template for use    Initial draft for use with
               Goleria                 with LeanMBASE v1.0           LeanMBASE v1.0

10/18/06       Girija         1.1     Section 5 COCOMO II          Peer Review
               Goleria                 estimation

10/22/06       Girija         1.2     Section 4.3 and 4.4 is       According to suggestions
               Goleria                 deleted                      made at the LCO ARB and
                                      Added Table 9                 the suggestions made by
                                                                    IV & V problems
                                      Modified table names and
                                       figure names, section 1.3

11/03/06       Alexander      1.3                                   Changes made to include
               Prince                                              IV&V suggestions
11/15/06       Girija         1.4     Section 5, Section           Changes made to include
               Goleria                2.3.2,Section 1.1            suggestions of LCO package
                                                                   given by the TA.
11/26/06       Girija         1.5     Section 4.1.4,1.3            Changes made according to
               Goleria                                             LCA requirements
12/02/06       Girija         1.6     Section 1.2, Table 11,       Changes made according to
               Goleria                Section 5, Section 2.3.2     LCA ARB suggestions and
                                                                   LCA Draft IV&V
                                                                   suggestions




f93cde67-93d7-4256-8bf8-206c68c9864b.doc6    ii                              Version Date: 12/02/06
Life Cycle Plan (LCP)                                                                                                                                  Version no 1.6



Table of Contents
Life Cycle Plan (LCP) ....................................................................................................................................................i
Version History ............................................................................................................................................................ ii
Table of Contents......................................................................................................................................................... iii
Table of Tables .............................................................................................................................................................iv
Table of Figures .............................................................................................................................................................v

1.           Introduction .....................................................................................................................................................1
             1.1 Status of the LCP Document ....................................................................................................................1
             1.2 Assumptions .............................................................................................................................................1
             1.3 References ................................................................................................................................................2

2.           Milestones and Products ..................................................................................................................................3
             2.1 Overall Strategy.........................................................................................................................................3
             2.2 Phases ........................................................................................................................................................4
             2.3 Project Deliverables ..................................................................................................................................5
                      2.3.1 Engineering Stage ..................................................................................................................5
                      2.3.2 Production Stage ....................................................................................................................6

3.           Responsibilities ...............................................................................................................................................8
             3.1 Overall Summary ......................................................................................................................................8
             3.2 By Phase / Stage ........................................................................................................................................9

4.           Approach ....................................................................................................................................................... 11
             4.1 Monitoring and Control ........................................................................................................................... 11
                     4.1.1 Closed Loop Feedback Control ............................................................................................ 11
                     4.1.2 Reviews ................................................................................................................................ 12
                     4.1.3 Status Reporting ................................................................................................................... 12
                     4.1.4 Risk Monitoring and Control ............................................................................................... 13
                     4.1.5 Project Communications, Methods, Tools and Facilities ..................................................... 13
             4.2 Methods, Tools and Facilities.................................................................................................................. 14

5.           Resources ...................................................................................................................................................... 15
6.           Appendix ....................................................................................................................................................... 18




f93cde67-93d7-4256-8bf8-206c68c9864b.doc6                                      iii                                                        Version Date: 12/02/06
Life Cycle Plan (LCP)                                                                                                                               Version 1.6



Table of Tables
Table 1: Major Milestone ..............................................................................................................................................4

Table 2: Artifact deliverable in Engineering Stage (LCO) ............................................................................................5

Table 3: Artifact deliverable in Engineering Stage (LCA) ............................................................................................5

Table 4: Artifact deliverable in Production Stage .........................................................................................................6

Table 5: Artifact deliverable in Production Stage (client side deliverables) .................................................................7

Table 6: Stakeholder responsibilities during software life cycle ...................................................................................8

Table 7: Stakeholder responsibilities during Inception and Elaboration ......................................................................9

Table 8: Stakeholder responsibilities during Construction and Transition ................................................................. 10

Table 9: Qualification Required by 577b .................................................................................................................... 10

Table 10: Authorized Stakeholder Representatives ..................................................................................................... 11

Table 11: Types of Reviews ......................................................................................................................................... 13

Table 12: Sample Current Risks .................................................................................................................................. 14

Table 13: Methods, Tools and Facilities .................................................................................................................... 15

Table 14: COCOMOII Scale Driver ............................................................................................................................ 16

Table 15: COCOMOII Cost Driver ............................................................................................................................. 17




f93cde67-93d7-4256-8bf8-206c68c9864b.doc                                    iv                                                     Version Date: 12/02/06
Life Cycle Plan (LCP)                                                                                                    Version 1.6


Table of Figures
Figure 1: Estimate Overview before adjusting the pessimistic value of effort....... Error! Bookmark not defined.18

Figure 2: Estimate Overview after adjusting the pessimistic value of effort ........... Error! Bookmark not defined.19

Figure 3: Scale Factors and SCED .......................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.20

No table of figures entries found. Figure 5: SLOC & EAF forProject Level Input Error! Bookmark not defined.21

No table of figures entries found.




f93cde67-93d7-4256-8bf8-206c68c9864b.doc                      v                                            Version Date: 12/02/06
Life Cycle Plan (LCP)                                                              Version no 1.6




1. Introduction


1.1 Status of the LCP Document
The LCP Report summarizes the information for controlling and monitoring the project‟s
progress in achieving the project‟s objective which is to design a cost estimation feature within
Eclipse Process Framework (EPF).
Current LCP document is based on WINWIN negotiations and developers‟ study of the project
requirements based on the LCO conclusions. The initial LCA version hopes to achieve
 The detailed plans for elaboration.
 The Life Cycle Process Strategy
 Extract milestones for the subsequent phases of development.
 Plan the next iteration for Risk Mitigation, Scheduling, etc.
 Ensure smooth transition into the Construction phase
 Activity identification and assignment




1.2 Assumptions
   A development team of 6 people will undertake the complete project execution
   Every member of developing team must follow the project schedule.
   Any addition / modification to the existing functional capabilities of cost estimation feature
    in EPF is beyond the scope of the project
   The Project‟s development costs should be $0, including cost of COTS. The client would not
    provide any budget for the system development.
   The system requirements are not expected to change radically.
   The Engineering is to be completed in 12 weeks, and the complete project with
    implementation is to be completed in 24 weeks time
   Client will be available for providing information and feedback to the development team.
   All documents must follow the LeanMBASE Guideline with tailoring.
   Two developers from the current 577a team are continuing on to 577b




f93cde67-93d7-4256-8bf8-206c68c9864b.doc        1                           Version date: 12/02/06
Life Cycle Plan (LCP)                                                                  Version no 1.6



1.3 References

LCP Template
http://greenbay.usc.edu/csci577/fall2006/site/guidelines/LeanMBASEtemplates/LeanMBASE_v
1.6_templates_for_LCP.doc

LCO ARB
http://greenbay.usc.edu/csci577/fall2006/projects/team12/LCO/LCP_LCO_F06a_T12_V01.1.do
c

LCA ARB
http://greenbay.usc.edu/csci577/fall2006/projects/team12/LCO/LCP_LCA_F06a_T12_V1.5.doc

Easy Win-Win Negotiation tool
http://alanya.usc.edu/AMWebHost/default.asp/

MBASE Guidelines
http://cse.usc.edu/classes/cs577b_2005/guidelines/MBASE_Guidelines_v2.4.2.pdf

COCOMO estimates
http://greenbay.usc.edu/csci577/fall2006/projects/team12/LCO/COCOMO_LCA_F06a_T12_V0
1.2.est

Weekly Progress Reports
http://greenbay.usc.edu/csci577/fall2006/projects/team12/PR

SID document
http://greenbay.usc.edu/csci577/fall2006/projects/team12/LCO/SID_LCO_F06a_T12_V01.5.doc




f93cde67-93d7-4256-8bf8-206c68c9864b.doc             2                          Version date: 12/02/06
Life Cycle Plan (LCP)                                                             Version no 1.6



2. Milestones and Products
This section provides task enumeration, task scheduling and assignment details.


2.1 Overall Strategy
The core purpose of the system is to integrate a cost estimation feature similar to COCOMO II
model within EPF.

The project will follow an incremental development strategy modeled around the Win-Win spiral
model.

The major stages of project development are as follows:

    1. Engineering Stage [577a]
          a. Inception (LCO)
                   i. Win-Win Negotiation
                  ii. Operational Concept Definition
                 iii. Initial Prototype
                 iv. Requirement Documentation
                  v. Study and design of Architecture
                 vi. Feasibility analysis and Risk identification
          b. Elaboration (LCA)
                   i. OCD Elaboration
                  ii. Requirements Management
                 iii. Risk Management
                 iv. Architecture Selection and Documentation
                  v. Feasibility Rationale
                 vi. Prototype
    2. Production Stage [577b]
          a. Construction
                   i. RLCA Package
                  ii. IOC
                 iii. Development Iterations will include
                          1. Development
                          2. Testing
                          3. Release Feedback
          b. Transition
                   i. Final product documentation
                  ii. Product Manual
                 iii. Release




f93cde67-93d7-4256-8bf8-206c68c9864b.doc        3                          Version date: 12/02/06
Life Cycle Plan (LCP)                                                               Version no 1.6


Process Feasibility Strategy:

The client indicated that the highest priority component of the system is the estimation of cost
and schedule similar to COCOMO II model. The development of the interface to see and input
the cost estimation variables constitutes the “Core Capability” of the system. Section 5 of this
document dwells into the feasibility rationale for the schedule.

The iterative nature of release ensures timely mitigation of risks. Given the present scope of the
project, the most important risk is that of Schedule variation. This will be handled by incremental
development. The schedule as independent variable (SAIV) approach will be followed for the
iterative development.

The process feasibility is discussed in further detail in Section 5 of the Feasibility Rationale
Description (FRDV1.6) found on the Project Website.


2.2 Phases
The list of major milestones is provided below.

                                     Table 1: Major Milestones

                          Engineering Stage
                          Milestone                     Scheduled
                                                        Delivery
                          LCO Draft                       10/11/2006
                          LCO ARB                         10/16/2006
                          LCO Package                     10/23/2006
                          LCA Draft                       11/20/2006
                          LCA ARB                         11/27/2006
                          LCA Package                     12/04/2006
                          Production Stage
                          Milestone                         Delivery
                          RLCA Draft                        2/1/2007
                          RLCA ARB                          2/7/2007
                          RLCA Package                     2/16/2007
                          Core Capability Drive-            3/4/2007
                          Though
                          CCD Report                       3/30/2007
                          IOC Working Set #1                4/4/2007
                          Draft Transition Readiness       4/11/2007
                          Review (TRR)
                          TRR ARB:                           4/12/07
                          Release Readiness Review         4/18/2007
                          Project Release                   5/2/2007


f93cde67-93d7-4256-8bf8-206c68c9864b.doc          4                          Version date: 12/02/06
Life Cycle Plan (LCP)                                                                     Version no 1.6




2.3 Project Deliverables


2.3.1 Engineering Stage
There are 2 phases in engineering stage, which are Inception phase and Elaboration phase.


                        Table 2: Artifact deliverable in Engineering Stage (LCO)

LCO Artifacts                 Due Date             Format             Medium
Easy WIN-WIN Report           10/02/2006           MS Word / PDF Soft copy @ Team
                                                                 Website
Operational Concept           10/04/2006           MS Word / PDF Soft copy @ Team
Description (OCD)                                                Website
System and Software           10/04/2006           MS Word / PDF Soft copy @ Team
Requirements                                                     Website
Description (SSRD)
Support Information           10/04/2006           MS Word / PDF Soft copy @ Team
Document (SID)                                                   Website
System and Software           10/11/2006           MS Word / PDF Soft copy @ Team
Architecture Description                                         Website
(SSAD)
Life Cycle Plan (LCP)         10/11/2006           MS Word / PDF Soft copy @ Team
                                                                 Website
Feasibility Rationale         10/11/2006           MS Word / PDF Soft copy @ Team
Description (FRD)                                                Website
UML Model (RSA)               10/11/2006           EMX                Soft copy @ Team
                                                                      Website



                        Table 3: Artifact deliverable in Engineering Stage (LCA)

LCA Artifacts                 Due Date             Format             Medium
Elaborated Operational        12/04/2006           MS Word / PDF Soft copy @ Team
Concept Description                                              Website
(OCD)
Elaborated System and         12/04/2006           MS Word / PDF Soft copy @ Team


f93cde67-93d7-4256-8bf8-206c68c9864b.doc           5                               Version date: 12/02/06
Life Cycle Plan (LCP)                                                                Version no 1.6


Software Requirements                                               Website
Description (SSRD)
Refined System and          12/04/2006          MS Word / PDF Soft copy @ Team
Software Architecture                                         Website
Description (SSAD)
Life Cycle Plan (LCP)       12/04/2006          MS Word / PDF Soft copy @ Team
                                                              Website
Feasibility Rationale       12/04/2006          MS Word / PDF Soft copy @ Team
Description (FRD)                                             Website


2.3.2 Production Stage
There are 2 phases in production stage, which are construction phase and transition phase.

                         Table 4: Artifact deliverable in Production Stage

Artifact                      Due Date                 Format                  Medium
RLCA Package                  2/17/2007                MS Word / PDF           Soft Copy @Team
                                                                               Website
Iteration Plans               2/16/2007                MS Word / PDF           Soft Copy @Team
                                                                               Website
Quality Management Plan       2/16/2007                MS Word / PDF           Soft Copy @Team
                                                                               Website
Peer Review Plan              3/4/2007                 MS Word / PDF           Soft Copy @Team
                                                                               Website
Iteration Assessment          3/30/2007                MS Word / PDF           Soft Copy @Team
Reports                                                                        Website
Test Plan and Cases(s)        3/30/2007                MS Word / PDF           Soft Copy @Team
                                                                               Website
Test Procedure and Results 3/30/3007                   JAR                     Soft Copy @Team
                                                                               Website
Peer Review Reports           3/30/2007                MS Word / PDF           Soft Copy @Team
                                                                               Website
Load Modules                  4/4/2007                 Java/EPF format         Soft Copy @Team
                                                                               Website
Installation Scripts          4/4/2007                 MS Word / PDF           Soft Copy @Team
                                                                               Website
Release Description           4/18/2007                MS Word / PDF           Soft Copy @Team
                                                                               Website
Source Code                   5/2/2007                 MS Word / PDF           Soft Copy @Team
                                                                               Website
Software Development          5/2/2007                 MS Word / PDF           Soft Copy @Team
Files                                                                          Website



f93cde67-93d7-4256-8bf8-206c68c9864b.doc        6                             Version date: 12/02/06
Life Cycle Plan (LCP)                                                                   Version no 1.6




              Table 5: Artifact deliverable in Production Stage (client side deliverables)

Artifact                       Due Date                  Format                   Medium
Transition Plan                2/7/2007                  MS Word / PDF            Soft Copy @Team
                                                                                  Website
Support Plan                   2/16/2007                 MS Word / PDF            Soft Copy @Team
                                                                                  Website
IOC Working Set #1             4/4/2007                  MS Word / PDF            Soft Copy @Team
                                                                                  Website
Regression Test Package        4/12/2007                 MS Word / PDF            Soft Copy @Team
                                                                                  Website
Version Description            4/18/2007                 MS Word / PDF            Soft Copy @Team
Document (or Final                                                                Website
Release Notes)




f93cde67-93d7-4256-8bf8-206c68c9864b.doc           7                             Version date: 12/02/06
         Life Cycle Plan (LCP)                                                                   Version no 1.6




         3. Responsibilities
         This section defines the roles that various stakeholders are expected to play.


         3.1 Overall Summary
                            Table 6: Stakeholder responsibilities during software life cycle

                      Inception             Elaboration           Construction            Transition
Client                Introduce             Review                Review and test         Implement
                      requirements.         requirement and       release versions.       product in
                      Review and            concept               Provide feedback.       operational
                      support definitions   documents.            Participate in ARB      environment
                      of requirements.      Provide feedback
                      Provide feedback      on design.
                      on prototype.         Participate in LCA
                      Participate in LCO    ARB.
                      ARB
Developers            Define and deliver    Elaborate on          Incrementally           Provide minimal
                      project artifacts –   operational           develop and             user training
                      operational           concept and           release tool
                      concept,              requirements.         versions. Develop
                      requirements          Manage risks.         and implement test
                      specification and     Select                plan. Incorporate
                      architectural         architecture.         client feedback.
                      options. Determine    Document              Document and
                      feasibility, risks,   artifacts, plan and   deliver User and
                      and plan.             feasibility           Developer
                                                                  manuals.
Users /               Support client        Support client        Support release         Test product in
Maintainers           interaction with      interaction with      testing and provide     operational
                      the development       the development       feedback.               environment
                      team.                 team.
IV&V                  Provide               Provide feedback      Evaluation of           Transition
(Reviewers)           constructive          on artifact quality   artifacts and           Deliverables
                      criticism to          to improve future     Testing                 Quality
                      improve               versions                                      Assurance
                      deliverable quality




         f93cde67-93d7-4256-8bf8-206c68c9864b.doc          8                              Version date: 12/02/06
Life Cycle Plan (LCP)                                                                  Version no 1.6



3.2 By Phase / Stage
In this section, we will identify the development team and stakeholder representatives. Enlisted
below are the individual development responsibilities categorized by development stage.


           Table 7: Stakeholder responsibilities during Inception and Elaboration phase



    Team                Role                Inception                          Elaboration
   Member
                                  Primary        Secondary      Primary        Secondary
                                  Responsibility Responsibility Responsibility Responsibility
Prince             Project        Prototype      FRD            Prototype      FRD
Alexander          Manager
Girija Goleria     Life Cycle     LCP, Quality         SSRD, Win-    LCP, Quality      SSAD
                   Planning       Focal Point          Win           Focal Point
                                                       Negotiation
Tanya Jacob        Feasibility    FRD, Risk            OCD           FRD, Risk         Quality
                   Rationale      Management                         Management        Assurance
                   Description
Pawan              Operational    OCD,                 SSAD          Website           SSAD
Chandak            Concept        Website
                   Description
Gaurav             SSAD           SSAD                 SSAD, UML     UML               SSAD
Badlaney                                               Modeling      Modeling
Bankim             SSRD           SSRD, Win-           UML           UML               SSAD
Bhalaria                          Win                  Modeling      Modeling
                                  Negotiation
Christopher        IV&V           Verification         Quality       Evaluation        Quality
Higginbotham                      and                  Assurance     and Testing,      Assurance
                                  Validation                         QMP
Michael            IV&V           Verification         Quality       Evaluation        Quality
Medved                            and                  Assurance     and Testing,      Assurance
                                  Validation                         QMP
Ye Yang,           Client         Provide              Provide       Provide           Review
                                  Requirements,        Feedback      Feedback          Documents
                                  Define Project
                                  scope
LiGuo Huang        Client         Provide              Provide       Provide           Review
                                  Requirements,        Feedback      Feedback          Documents
                                  Define Project
                                  scope




f93cde67-93d7-4256-8bf8-206c68c9864b.doc           9                            Version date: 12/02/06
Life Cycle Plan (LCP)                                                                  Version no 1.6




         Table 8: Stakeholder responsibilities during Construction and Transition phase

Stakeholder             Construction                                  Transition
Client                  1. Review and test release versions.          1. Implement product in
                        2. Provide feedback on releases                  operational environment
                                                                      2. Incorporate tool in the
                                                                         current system
User / Maintainer 1. Support release testing                          1. Test product in operating
                  2. Provide feedback on maintainability of              Environment
                     tool                                             2. Help incorporate tool in
                  3. Provide suggestions fro ease of use                 current system
Project manager         1. Help coordinate development effort         1. Ensure correct release
                        2. Manage risks
Developers              1. Incorporate and train new team             1. Provide user introduction
                           members if any.                               (training) to the system
                        2. Developers need to incorporate any         2. Ensure smooth transition
                           design modifications and changes
                           according to their understanding.
                        3. Develop, test and release incremental
                           product versions as per schedule
                        4. Incorporate client feedback in following
                           releases
                        5. Document Development process
                        6. Document User Manual
IV&Vers                 1. Help deliver quality Documents             1. Help deliver Quality
                        2. Evaluate Artifacts                            product
                        3. Value based testing


                               Table 9: Qualification required by 577b

These criteria need to be considered when choosing the team continuing with the later half of the
project in CS577b.

                  Number       Required Qualifications
                  1            Knowledge of Java Programming is a must
                  2            EPF familiarity
                  3            COCOMO II model knowledge




f93cde67-93d7-4256-8bf8-206c68c9864b.doc          10                            Version date: 12/02/06
Life Cycle Plan (LCP)                                                             Version no 1.6




                        Table 10: Authorized Stakeholder Representatives

         Stakeholders                   Category                    Organization
Alexander Mathew,                    Development team      Department of Computer Science,
Girija Goleria,                                            University of Southern California
Tanya Jacob,
Pawan Chandak,
Gaurav Badlaney,
Bankim Bhalaria
LiGuo Huang,                                Client          Center of Software Engineering
Ye Yang                                                        Department (CSE),USC
Michael Medved,                            IV and V        Department of Computer Science,
Christopher Higginbotham                                   University of Southern California
Project manager/Maintainers                 Users            Organizations using EPF for
                                                                 project management




f93cde67-93d7-4256-8bf8-206c68c9864b.doc        11                         Version date: 12/02/06
Life Cycle Plan (LCP)                                                                Version no 1.6




4. Approach
This section covers the approach followed for various project activities during the life cycle. This
includes management, monitoring and control of the Project, process and model.


4.1 Monitoring and Control
The activities undertaken to monitor and control the project are:
1. A complete project plan has been prepared for the project using MS Project.
2. Weekly effort put in by the individual team members is tracked using the USC CSE Effort
   Reporting system.
   Ref: http://greenbay.usc.edu/ERSystem/
3. A weekly progress report is prepared on a weekly basis, based on the progress report
   template provided. These are posted on the project website.
4. The Project Plan is updated weekly for progress on scheduled activities. These are posted on
   the website as well.
5. Gantt charts provided my MS Project help monitor the Project status.
6. Project Milestones in MS Project help to track the project schedule status and control.
7. Client meetings to get proper time to time feedback.



4.1.1 Closed Loop Feedback Control
The weekly effort and progress reports identify the activities undertaken and completed in the
week. The MS Project plan provides the baseline for the activities. Any deviation from this base
line is identified, its severity is analyzed and action, as appropriate, is taken. This may include
revision of the activities planned for next week at one end to revision of the entire plan at the
extreme end.




f93cde67-93d7-4256-8bf8-206c68c9864b.doc        12                            Version date: 12/02/06
Life Cycle Plan (LCP)                                                                Version no 1.6



4.1.2 Reviews
There are three kinds of reviews undertaken during the various phases of the project to ensure the
quality of the deliverables. Their names, purpose, participants are listed below:

                                    Table 11: Types of Reviews

Review Type                       Participants                     Purpose
Agile Internal                    Development team (except the     To ensure that the team agrees
                                  Author of the Document)          on the documents content and
                                                                   Accuracy.
Agile Independent                 IV&Vers                          To ensure completeness,
                                                                   accuracy and quality of the
                                                                   deliverable
ARB                               Client, Development Team,        To ensure artifact standard,
                                  IV &V ers, USC CSE Faculty       quality, completeness and
                                  and Staff.                       accuracy


After completion of each version of a document, an internal review is performed. The suggested
changes are included in the same version of the document. The document is released after the
internal review process.

The important versions of document releases undergo an agile review by the IV&Vers. This
provides a dedicated critique to the document, helping improve its quality. The suggested
changes are included in the following versions of the document.

A formal review is conducted at the end of each phase. The development team presents the status
of the project through a presentation to the ARB members, CS 577a teaching faculty, Teaching
assistants and clients.



4.1.3 Status Reporting

A progress report, prepared on a weekly basis and the MS Project plan form the basis of the
Status reporting of the project. The MS Project plan provides a baseline for the project status.
The weekly progress report is the real-time status of the project, complete with plans, problems,
defects and risk identification. The status of the activities completed is reported via the MS
Project plan. The resultant Gantt chart provides a general overview of the project status in terms
of Milestones achieved and activity completion.
Reference to the projects weekly progress and status reports is mentioned in section 1.3.




f93cde67-93d7-4256-8bf8-206c68c9864b.doc        13                            Version date: 12/02/06
Life Cycle Plan (LCP)                                                               Version no 1.6



4.1.4 Risk Monitoring and Control

The top-n risks are identified and assessed each week. Steps are taken in the project plan and
design activity in order to mitigate chances of occurrence and loss in case of realization. A
detailed elaboration on the project specific risks can be found in the Feasibility Rationale
document (FRD) section 7.

A sample of current top-3 risks are listed below

                                      Table12: Current Risks

Rank Risk Item                Average                Mitigation Plan
                              Risk Exposure
                              P (UO) L (UO) RE
1      Personnel Continuity 8         7       56     Selection criteria for the team members
       is low from 577a to                           should be based on the student‟s
       577b.                                         knowledge in both JAVA and EPF.
2      Learning Curve is     7        7       49     Consult with EPF experts (IBM) and the
       steep for 577b                                577a team members.
       members in
       understanding
       COCOMO, EPF and
       its environment.
3      Lack of experience in 6        6       36     Training session and Workshops for the
       Eclipse Development                           development teams.
       framework.
4      IBM being a critical 5         7       35     IBM should be a major contributor in EPF
       stakeholder takes a                           training during the construction and
       complete backseat.                            transition phase of the project.



4.1.5 Project Communication Methods, Tools and Facilities
The following means of communication will be used:

Intra-Team Communication:
     Instant Messaging Conferences
     On Campus meetings
     Mailing list
     Email
     Telephone

Client Communication:


f93cde67-93d7-4256-8bf8-206c68c9864b.doc        14                           Version date: 12/02/06
Life Cycle Plan (LCP)                                                                  Version no 1.6


    On Campus, team meetings
    Email
The project mailing list is located at Goggle groups – eclipse-cocomo-ii@googlegroups.com

Communication with IV&Vers

Given the fact that the IV&Vers are located off-campus and are available for limited time, we
devised a plan involve them via mailing lists

In addition, whenever necessary, an online instant messaging conference is arranged such that
both the IV&Vers are available and can participate remotely. Also at times we even telephone
them keeping the time difference in mind.


4.2       Methods, Tools and Facilities
                                Table 13: Methods, Tools and Facilities

Tools /             Date(s)        Purpose                  Acquiring
Facilities
MS Project          9/17/06        Project planning and     USC CS Lab
Tool                Onwards        control
MS Word             9/16/06        Project Documentation    USC Computing facilities
                    Onwards
Adobe PDF           9/16/06        Project Documentation    USC Computing facilities
                    Onwards
Easy Win-Win        9/17/06 –      Easy win-win             Schedule Slots with TA. Ensure
Tool                10/02/06       negotiation with the     registration of tool
                                   Client
Lean MBASE          9/17/06        Documenting Project      Via Class website
Guidelines          Onwards        and Process
Computer            9/16/06        Project activities and   USC CS Lab
Access              Onwards        Documentation
USC                 9/25/06        Project Schedule         USC CSE
COCOMO II           Onwards        Estimation
Rational Rose       10/02/06       Project UML Modeling     USC Computing facilities
                    Onwards
MS EXCEL            9/17/06        Project reviews and      USC Computing Facilities
                    Onwards        reports
MS                  10/19/06       ARB presentations        USC Computing Facilities
PowerPoint
Document            9/19/06        Documenting Project      http://greenbay.usc.edu/csci577/fall2006/s
Templates           Onwards        and Process              ite/guidelines/index.html
DART                10/19/06       Documenting the Risks    USC Computing Facilities
                    Onwards


f93cde67-93d7-4256-8bf8-206c68c9864b.doc          15                            Version date: 12/02/06
Life Cycle Plan (LCP)                                                                  Version no 1.6



5. Resources
COMOMO II Estimate Rationale
The USC COCOMO II tool is used to devise the project effort estimate. This is used for ensuring
that project is feasible given a 6-student-team. This section provides the rationale for the values
set in the estimate.

                               Table 14: COCOMOII Scale Driver

  Scale Driver                 Value                              Rationale
PREC                    NOM                   There is a current application for reference
                                              but the re-engineering of the similar features
                                              in object –oriented language cannot be
                                              reused. Hence we have moderate reference
                                              to similar application.
TEAM                    HIGH                  All the stakeholders operate as a team There
                                              is a lot of interaction amongst all the team
                                              members as well as with the client.
FLEX                    LOW                   Need for software conformance is fixed
                                              with pre-established requirements.
PMAT                    HIGH                  We have CMM Level 3 as a maturity level.
RESL                    NOM                   We have 2 critical risks and some tool
                                              support for resolving risk items.

The estimation is done on bases of following modules:

 Module 1: Module Level
 Module 2: Project Level
 Module 3: Estimation
 Module 4: Local Calibration
 Module 5: Distribution View
 Module 6: Saving Estimates
 Module 7: Loading Projects

The low priority modules such as „loading saved effort multipliers‟ and „editing driver values‟
were deleted so that the pessimistic value of the effort would fit the schedule for a six person
team.

The SLOC for each module was decided on approximations based on previous programming
experiences and peer discussion.

The pessimistic value of the effort is being adjusted to ensure that the project is feasible even in
the worst possible case.




f93cde67-93d7-4256-8bf8-206c68c9864b.doc         16                             Version date: 12/02/06
Life Cycle Plan (LCP)                                                                   Version no 1.6




The table below defines the Effort multipliers set for each of the seven modules.

                                 Table 15: COCOMOII Cost Driver

  Cost Driver            Value             Module                      Rationale
RELY                    NOM      Module 1, 2, 3, 4, 5,   Significant business loss in case data
                                                         of the users is lost.
                                 6, 7

DATA                    NOM      Module 1,2,3,4, 5, 6,   D/P is <100
                                 7
DOCU                    HIGH     Module 1,2,3,4,5        Excessive for Life cycle needs
DOCU                    NOM      Module 6,7                 Nominal for life cycle needs
CPLX                    NOM      Module 1,3,4,6,7        The complexity for these modules
                                                            is nominal depending on the
                                                              project level information.
CPLX                    HIGH     Module 2, 5             For project level information and
                                                         distribution the complexity of the
                                                                  module increases
RUSE                    NOM      Module 1,2 ,3, 4, 5      The reuse of the files within the
                                 ,6, 7                           system is nominal.
TIME                    NOM      Module 1,2,3, 4, 5,     <=50% use of available execution
                                 6, 7                                    time
STOR                    NOM      Module 1,2, 3, 4, 5,     <=50% use of available storage
                                 6, 7
PVOL                    NOM      Module 1,2, 3, 4, 5,        Minor change every 2 weeks
                                 6, 7
ACAP                    NOM      Module 1,2, 3, 4,5             Around 55 percentile
                                 ,6, 7
PCAP                    NOM      Module 1,2, 3,                 Around 55 percentile
                                 4,5,6,7
PCON                    LOW      Module 1,2,3,4,5,6,7            Around 24%/year
APEX                    LOW      Module 1,2,3,4,5                     6 months
APEX                    NOM      Module 6,7                        Around 1 year
LTEX                    NOM      Module 1,2,3,4,5,6,7              Around 1year
PLEX                    NOM      Module 6,7                        Around 1 year
PLEX                    LOW      Module 1,2,3,4,5                     6 months
TOOL                    NOM      Module 1,2,3,4,5,6,7    Basic life cycle tools moderately
                                                                     integrated
SITE                    NOM      Module 1,2,3,4,5,6,7          Multi-city company


f93cde67-93d7-4256-8bf8-206c68c9864b.doc            17                          Version date: 12/02/06
Life Cycle Plan (LCP)                                               Version no 1.6




Reference to the COCOMO estimation is given in Section 1.3
The COCOMO Estimate screenshots can be found in Appendix.




f93cde67-93d7-4256-8bf8-206c68c9864b.doc   18                Version date: 12/02/06
Life Cycle Plan (LCP)                                                           Version no 1.6




6. Appendix
         Figure 1: Estimate Overview before adjusting the pessimistic value of effort




f93cde67-93d7-4256-8bf8-206c68c9864b.doc     19                          Version date: 12/02/06
Life Cycle Plan (LCP)                                                           Version no 1.6




          Figure 2: Estimate Overview after adjusting the pessimistic value of effort




f93cde67-93d7-4256-8bf8-206c68c9864b.doc      20                         Version date: 12/02/06
Life Cycle Plan (LCP)                                                        Version no 1.6




                                 Figure3: Scale Factors and SCED




                              Figure 4: SLOC & EAF for Module Level




f93cde67-93d7-4256-8bf8-206c68c9864b.doc       21                     Version date: 12/02/06
Life Cycle Plan (LCP)                                                           Version no 1.6


                           Figure5: SLOC & EAF for Project Level Input




                             Figure 6: SLOC & EAF for Estimation




f93cde67-93d7-4256-8bf8-206c68c9864b.doc       22                        Version date: 12/02/06
Life Cycle Plan (LCP)                                                           Version no 1.6


                          Figure 7: SLOC & EAF for Local Calibration




                        Figure 8: SLOC & EAF for Distribution over WBS




f93cde67-93d7-4256-8bf8-206c68c9864b.doc     23                          Version date: 12/02/06
Life Cycle Plan (LCP)                                                       Version no 1.6


                         Figure 9: SLOC & EAF for Saving Estimates




                        Figure 10: SLOC & EAF for Loading Projects




f93cde67-93d7-4256-8bf8-206c68c9864b.doc    24                       Version date: 12/02/06
Life Cycle Plan (LCP)                                                       Version no 1.6


                             Figure 11: Overall Project Estimation




f93cde67-93d7-4256-8bf8-206c68c9864b.doc      25                     Version date: 12/02/06

								
To top