Life Cycle Plan (LCP)

aquahellishSoftware and s/w Development

Dec 13, 2013 (3 years and 8 months ago)

98 views



aquahellish_b0414e39
-
7fc7
-
4e06
-
ac03
-
aa4cc7d8143b.doc



Version Date:
10
/
22
/12


Life Cycle Plan (LCP)









Flower
Seeker






Team 05




<
Date:
10/
22
/2012
>


















Name

Primary Role

Secondary Role

Chen Zhuang

Requirement Engineer

Feasibility Analyst

Yao
-
Sheng Tsai

System/Software Architect

Operational Concept
Engineer

Bo Yang

Prototype
r

Feasibility Analyst

Eder Figueroa

Project Manager

Requirement Engineer

Sophia Wu

Life cycle planner

System/software Architect

Doris Lam

Integrated Independent
Verification & Validation

TBA

aquahellish_b0414e39
-
7fc7
-
4e06
-
ac03
-
aa4cc7d8143b.doc


Version
3
.0



LCP_FCP_F12a_T05_V
3
.0

ii


Version Date:
10
/
22
/12


aquahellish_b0414e39
-
7fc7
-
4e06
-
ac03
-
aa4cc7d8143b.doc


Version
3
.0



LCP_FCP_F12a_T05_V
3
.0

iii


Version Date:
10
/
22
/12

V
ersion History


Date

Author

Version

Changes made

Rationale

10
/
0
3
/
12

BY
,
CZ

1
.0



Add Section
3.3



Initial draft Section
3.3

10/13/12

BY
,
CZ

2.0



Update Section 3.3, Add Section 1



Correct errors in Section 3.3 from
LC
P_VCP_F12a_T05_V1.0. Initial
draft Section 1

10/
22
/12

YT
, EF,
SW,BY,
CZ

3.0



Update Section 3.3
, Add Section 3.1,
3.2, 4, 5



Correct errors in Section 3.3 from
LCP_
F
CP_F12a_T05_V
2
.0. Initial
draft Section
4, 5



aquahellish_b0414e39
-
7fc7
-
4e06
-
ac03
-
aa4cc7d8143b.doc


Version
3
.0



LCP_FCP_F12a_T05_V
3
.0

iv


Version Date:
10
/
22
/12

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

Purpose of the LCP

................................
................................
................................
................................
....

1

1.2

Status of the LCP

................................
................................
................................
................................
.......

1

1.3

Assumptions

................................
................................
................................
................................
................

1

2.

Milestones and Products

................................
................................
................................
............................

2

2.1

Overall Strategy

................................
................................
................................
................................
.........

2

2.2

Project Deliverables

................................
................................
................................
................................
...

4

3.

Responsibilities

................................
................................
................................
................................
...........

7

3.1

Project
-
specific stakeholder’s responsibilities

................................
................................
.........................

7

3.2

Res
ponsibilities by Phase

................................
................................
................................
...........................

7

3.3

Skills

................................
................................
................................
................................
..........................

10

4.

Approach

................................
................................
................................
................................
..................

12

4.1

Monito
ring and Control

................................
................................
................................
..........................

12

4.2

Methods, Tools and Facilities

................................
................................
................................
..................

13

5.

Resources

................................
................................
................................
................................
..................

14

6. Iteration Plan

................................
................................
................................
................................
.........................

16

6.1 Plan
................................
................................
................................
................................
................................
...

16

6.1.1 Capabilities to be implemented

................................
................................
................................
...................

16

6.1.2 Capabilities to be tested

................................
................................
................................
................................

17

6.1.3 Capabilities not to be tested

................................
................................
................................
.........................

17

6.1.4 CCD Preparation Plans

................................
................................
................................
................................

17

6.2 Iteration Assessment

................................
................................
................................
................................
.......

18

6.2.1 Capabilities Implemented, Tested, and Results

................................
................................
.........................

18

6.2.2 Core Capabilities Drive
-
Through Results

................................
................................
................................
..

18

aquahellish_b0414e39
-
7fc7
-
4e06
-
ac03
-
aa4cc7d8143b.doc


Version
3
.0



LCP_FCP_F12a_T05_V
3
.0

v


Version Date:
10
/
22
/12

6.3 Adherence to Plan

................................
................................
................................
................................
...........

18

aquahellish_b0414e39
-
7fc7
-
4e06
-
ac03
-
aa4cc7d8143b.doc


Version
3
.0

aquahellish_b0414e39
-
7fc7
-
4e06
-
ac03
-
aa4cc7d8143b.doc



Version Date:
10
/
22
/12


Table of Tables

Table 1: Artifacts Deliverables in Exploration Phase

................................
................................
................................
...

4

Table 2: Artifact deliverable in Valuation Phase

................................
................................
................................
..........

4

Table 3: Artifact de
liverable in Foundations Phase

................................
................................
................................
......

6

Table 4: Artifact deliverable in Development Phase

................................
................................
................................
.....

6

Table 5:
Project
-
specific stakeholder’s re
sponsibilities

................................
................................
................................

7

Table 6: Stakeholder's Responsibilities in each phase

................................
................................
................................
..

7

Table 7: COCOMOII Scale Driver

................................
................................
................................
..............................

14

Table 8: COCOMOII Cost Driver

................................
................................
................................
...............................

15

Table 9: Construction iteration capabilities to be implemented

................................
................................
..................

17

Table 10: Construction iteration capabilities to be tested

................................
................................
...........................

17

Table 11: Capabilities implemented, tested, and results

................................
................................
.............................

18


aquahellish_b0414e39
-
7fc7
-
4e06
-
ac03
-
aa4cc7d8143b.doc


Version
3
.0


aquahellish_b0414e39
-
7fc7
-
4e06
-
ac03
-
aa4cc7d8143b.doc



Version Date:
10
/
22
/12


Table of Figures

Figure

1:
Architected Agile Process Pattern & Use Single NDI Process Pattern

................................
........................

2

Figure

2:
NDI
-
Intensive Process Pattern & Net
-
Centric Service

Process Pattern

................................
.......................

3

Figure

3:
COCOMO II Scale Factors

................................
................................
................................
.........................

14

Figure

4:
COCOMO II EAF
-

payment

................................
................................
................................
.......................

16

LCP_FCP_F12a_T05_V
3
.0




Version
3
.0


LCP_FCP_F12a_T05_V
3
.0

1

Version Date:
10
/
22
/12

1.

In
troduction


1.1

Purpose

of the LCP

T
he purpose of
LCP document is to

show the objective of this project,

to show the assumptions

this project based on, to show the place where we do this project,
to identify
responsibilities
and
skills
for each role
,

to recor
d
milestones
at

each phase
,

and
to record

the approach
es

that are

used

to achieve the
se

goal
s
.


1.2

Status of the LCP

T
his is the
third

edition of LCP. This time we
completed

section 1
-
5

of this file and make some
modifications on the section 3.3.


1.3

Assumption
s

(1)T
he

duration

of

the

projuct

is

two

semester

about

28

weeks

from

2012

fall

to

2013

spring

(2)The team ha
s

5 on
-
campus students and one den student

LCP_FCP_F12a_T05_V
3
.0




Version
3
.0


LCP_FCP_F12a_T05_V
3
.0

2

Version Date:
10
/
22
/12

2.

Milestones and Products


2.1

Overall Strategy

Figure

1
:
Architected Agile Process P
attern & Use Single NDI Process Pattern











LCP_FCP_F12a_T05_V
3
.0




Version
3
.0


LCP_FCP_F12a_T05_V
3
.0

3

Version Date:
10
/
22
/12

Figure

2
:
NDI
-
Intensive

Process Pattern &
Net
-
Centric Service

Process Pattern


The
FlowerSeeker

is following Architected Agile process because
based on the above
process pattern d
iagrams,
Architected Agile process

has
the

minimum number
of
non
-
conforming points

among all four process patterns
and
there is
no suitable

NDI (
N
on
-
Development Item
)

or Web service that would fit to most of the core capabilities.
However, we
will use some

Web services in FlowerSeeker such as online payment and order tracking
information.


Exploration phase

Duration:

0
9
/
12
/
20
12
-

10
/
8
/
20
12


Concept:

During
the
Exploration phase
, the
team

set up several meetings to understanding
flower business,
identif
ying

p
roject operational concept
, life cycle plan
,
and
system and
software
boundary
,
understanding all
success
-
critical
stakeholders, team members’ skills, and
identifies

risks and mitigation plan for each
risk
.


Deliverables
: Valuation Commitment Package

Miles
tone
: Valuation Commitment Review

Strategy
: One Incremental Commitment Cycle

LCP_FCP_F12a_T05_V
3
.0




Version
3
.0


LCP_FCP_F12a_T05_V
3
.0

4

Version Date:
10
/
22
/12

Valuation

phase

Duration:

10
/
9
/
20
12
-

1
1
/
12
/
20
12


Concept:

During
the
Valuation
phase
, the
team prioritizes

win conditions, minimum
marketable features and capabilities of FlowerS
eeker and elaborates
use
-
cases and UI
prototype
s on all critical
functionality
.
The team continue revise and complete operational
concept, business workflow, creating a draft of system and software architecture, and
deciding the process pattern the team sh
ould follow.

Deliverables
:
Foundations

Commitment Package

Milestone
:
Foundations

Commitment Review

Strategy
:
Win
-
win negotiation, prototype development
for critical functionality


2.2

Project Deliverables


2.2.1

Exploration Phase

Table
1
: A
rtifacts Deliverables in Exploration Phase

Artifact

Due date

Format

Medium

Client Interaction Report

09/19/2012

.doc, .pdf

Soft copy

Valuation Commitment Package



Operational Concept Description (OCD)
Early Section



Life Cycle Plan (LCP) Early Section



Fea
sibility Evidence Description (FED) Early
Section

10/03/2012

.doc, .pdf

Soft copy

Evaluation of Valuation Commitment Package

10/08/2012

.xls

Soft copy

Project Effort

Report

Every Monday

t
ext

ER system

Project Plan

Every
Wednesday

.mpp, .pdf

Soft copy

P
rogress Report

Every
Wednesday

.xls

Soft copy

2.2.2

Valuation Phase

Table
2
:
Artifact deliverable in
Valuation Phase

Artifact

Due date

Format

Medium

Core
Foundation

Commitment Package



Operational Concept Description (OCD)



Life Cycle Pl
an (LCP)

Section

1 and 3.3



Feasibility Evidence Description (FED)
Section

1 and 5

10/15/2012

.doc, .pdf

Soft copy

LCP_FCP_F12a_T05_V
3
.0




Version
3
.0


LCP_FCP_F12a_T05_V
3
.0

5

Version Date:
10
/
22
/12



Prototype Report

(PRO) Initial draft



System and Software Architecture
Description

(SSAD)
Early Section



Supporting Information Document

(SID)

Evaluation of Core
Foundation

Commitment
Package

10/22/2012

.xls

Soft copy

Draft
Foundation

Commitment Package



Operational Concept Description (OCD)



Life Cycle Plan (LCP)

Section

1 and 5



Feasibility Evidence Description (FED)

Section

1 and 5




Prototype R
eport

(PRO) Initial draft



System and Software Architecture
Description

(SSAD)
Revised
Early Section



Supporting Information Document

(SID)

10/22/2012

.doc, .pdf

Soft copy

Response to Evaluation of Core
Foundation

Commitment Package

10/24/2012

text

Bugzilla

system

Evaluation of
Draft
Foundation

Commitment
Package

10/26/2012

.xls

Soft copy

Foundation

Commitment Package



Operational Concept Description (OCD)



Life Cycle Plan (LCP)

Section

1 and 5



Feasibility Evidence Description (FED)

Section

1 and 5



Prototy
pe Report

(PRO) Initial draft



System and Software Architecture
Description

(SSAD)
Complete Section 1 and
2



Supporting Information Document

(SID)



Quality Management Plan

(QMP) Section 1
and 2

10/26/2012

.doc, .pdf

Soft copy

Response to Evaluation of Draft

Foundation

Commitment Package

10/26/2012

text

Bugzilla

system

Quality Management Plan

(QMP)

#1

10/26/2012

.doc, .pdf

Soft copy

Evaluation of
F
oundation

Commitment
Package

11/05/2012

.xls

Soft copy

Response to Evaluation of
Foundation

Commitment Package

11/12/2012

text

Bugzilla

system

Project Effort

Report

Every Monday

text

ER system

COTIPMO

Every
Wednesday

t
ext

COTIPMO

system

Project Plan

Every
Wednesday

.mpp, .pdf

Soft copy

Progress Report

Every
Wednesday

.xls

Soft copy

LCP_FCP_F12a_T05_V
3
.0




Version
3
.0


LCP_FCP_F12a_T05_V
3
.0

6

Version Date:
10
/
22
/12

2.2.3


Foundations Phase

T
able
3
:
Artifact deliverable in
Foundations Phase

Artifact

Due date

Format

Medium

TBA

TBA

TBA

TBA

2.2.4

Development Phase

Table
4
:
Artifact deliverable in
Development

Phase

Artifact

Due date

Format

Medium

TBA

TB
A

TBA

TBA


LCP_FCP_F12a_T05_V
3
.0




Version
3
.0


LCP_FCP_F12a_T05_V
3
.0

7

Version Date:
10
/
22
/12

3.

Responsibilities


3.1

Project
-
specific stakeholder’s responsibilities

In our project, other than typical stakeholders, we also have some project
-
specific stakeholders
as showed in the table 5 below

Table
5
:
Project
-
specific
stakeholder’s responsibilities

Roles

Responsibilities

Lawyer



Deal with all the legal issues of the
system since our system is involving the
sale of plants.

Jessica's Mom



Provide different kinds of design of
flowers and occasion models to the
develop tea
m so that the develop team
can build the web site based on that.


3.2

Responsibilities by Phase

Table
6
:
Stakeholder's Responsibilities in each phase

Team Member /
Role

Primary / Secondary Responsibility

Exploration

Valuation

Foundat
ions

Development
-

Construction
Iteration

Development
-

Transition
Iteration

Name:

Eder Figueroa

Role
:

Project Manager

&

Requirement
Engineer


Primary
Responsibility

(1)I
dentify
objectives,

constraints, and

priorities


(2)
Record Project

Progress


(3) Mana
ge team
and

delegate
tasks to team
members


Primary
Responsibility

(1)

Plan the

Project


(2) Manage
team
and

delegate tas
ks to
team members


(3)
Record
Project

Progress


Secondary
Primary
Responsibility

(1)

Plan the

Project


(2) Manage team
and

delegate
tasks to team
members


(3)
Record Project

Progress



Secondary
Primary
Responsibility

(1)

Plan the

Project


(2) Manage team
and

delegate tasks
to team members



(3)
Record Project

Progress


Secondary
Responsibility

(4)

Reevaluate

Primary
Responsibility

(1)

Plan the

Project


(2) Manage team
and

delegate
tasks to team
members


(3)
Record
Project

Progress




LCP_FCP_F12a_T05_V
3
.0




Version
3
.0


LCP_FCP_F12a_T05_V
3
.0

8

Version Date:
10
/
22
/12

(4)Lead teams
Communicate
with clients



Secondary
Responsibility

(5)

Analyze

implementation

difficulty


(6)Communicate
with clients

Responsibility

(4)

Develop
Requirement
definition

Responsibi
lity

(4)

Reevaluate

requirements

add or modify the
requirement
report if
necessary

requi
rements

add or modify the
requirement report
if necessary


Secondary
Responsibility



Name
:

Sophia Wu

Role
:

Life cycle planner
&

System/software
Architect

Primary
Responsibility

(1)
Identify

responsibilities

and skills


(2)Make project
plan


Secondary
Responsibility

(3)

Analyze the

current System



Primary
Responsibility

(1)

Plan for
project

Lifecycle


(2)

Identify

Milestones and

P
roducts


(3)

Assess Life

Cycle Content


Secondary
Responsibility


(4)

Explore and

Define system
Architect


(5)
Explore and

Define NDI/NCS


Primary
Responsibility

(1)

Plan for
project

Lifecycle


(2)

Identify

Milestones and

Products


(3)

Assess Life

Cycle C
ontent


Secondary
Responsibility

(4)

Describe the

architecture,
patterns,

and

frameworks



Primary
Responsibility

(1)

Plan for project

Lifecycle


(2)

Identify

Milestones and

Products


(3)

Assess Life

Cycle Content


Secondary
Responsibility

(4)modify the
ar
chitecture,
patterns,

and

frameworks

if necessary



Primary
Responsibility

(1)

Plan for
project

Lifecycle


(2)

Identify

Milestones and

Products


(3)

Assess Life

Cycle Content


Secondary
Responsibility


Name
:

Bo Yang

Role
:

Prototyper
&

Feasibility Analyst

P
rimary
Responsibility

(1)
Prioritize

Capabilities


(2) Design
prototype


Secondary
Responsibility

(3)

Analyze the

current System


Primary
Responsibility

(1) Design
prototype


(2) Revise the
prototype


Secondary
Responsibility

(3)Analyze
proposed
System


(
4)

Assess and

evaluate

possible NDI

/NCS

A
nd
Explore

Alternatives


Primary
Responsibility

(1) Revise
prototype


Secondary
Responsibility

(2)

Provide

Feasibi
lity

Evidence


(3)

Analyze,

prioritize, and

provide plans

for risk

mitigation


Primary
Responsibility

(1)If necessary,
make prototype for
some new modules
or new
requirements


Secondary
Responsibility

(2)

Provide

Feasibility

Evidence


(3)

Analyze,

prioriti
ze, and

provide plans

for risk

mitigation


Primary
Responsibility



Secondary
Responsibility

(1)
Analyze,

prioritize, and

provide plans

for risk

mitigation


LCP_FCP_F12a_T05_V
3
.0




Version
3
.0


LCP_FCP_F12a_T05_V
3
.0

9

Version Date:
10
/
22
/12

(5)

Provide

Feasibility

Evidence


(6)

Analyze,

prioritize, and

provide plans

for risk

mitigation



Name
:

Chen Zhuang

Role
:

Requirement
Engineer
&

Feasibility Analyst

Primary
Responsibility

(1)

Analyz
e

implementation

difficulty


(2)Communicate
with clients


Secondary
Responsibility

(3)

Analyze the

current System


Primary
Responsibility

(1)

Develop
Requirement
definition


Secondary
Responsibility

(2)Analyze
proposed
System


(3)

Assess and

evaluate

possi
ble NDI

/NCS

A
nd
Explore

Alternatives


(4)

Provide

Feasibility

Evidence


(5)

Analyze,

prioritize, and

provide plans

for risk

mitigation


Primary
Responsibility

(1)

Reevaluate

requirements

add or modify the
requirement if
necessary


Secondary
Responsibili
ty

(2)

Provide

Feasibility

Evidence


(3)

Analyze,

prioritize, and

provide plans

for risk

mitigation


Primary
Responsibility

(1)

Reevaluate

requirements

add or modify the
requirement if
necessary


Secondary
Responsibility

(2)

Provide

Feasibility

Evidence


(3)

Analyze,

prioritize, and

provide plans

for risk

mitigation


Primary
Responsibility


Secondary
Responsibility

(1)
Analyze,

prioritize, and

provide plans

for risk

mitigation


Name
:

Yao
-
Sheng Tsai

Role
:

System/Software
Architect
&

Operational Concept
Eng
ineer

Primary
Responsibility

(1)

Explore the

current system

Primary
Responsibility

(1)

Explore and

Define system
Architect


(2)
Explore and

Define NDI/NCS


Secondary
Responsibility

(3)

Provide

New

operational

concept of

proposed

system


Primary
Responsib
ility

(1)

Describe the

architecture,
patterns,

and

frameworks


Secondary
Responsibility


(2)

Find

ready
-
to
-
use

NDI or
NCS


Primary
Responsibility

(1)modify the
architecture,
patterns,

and

frameworks

if necessary



Secondary
Responsibility



Primary
Respons
ibility



Secondary
Responsibility



LCP_FCP_F12a_T05_V
3
.0




Version
3
.0


LCP_FCP_F12a_T05_V
3
.0

10

Version Date:
10
/
22
/12

Name
:

Doris Lam

Role
:

Integrated
Independent
Verification &
Validation

Primary
Responsibility

(1)

Verify and
validate

work products

Primary
Responsibility

(1)

Verify and
validate

work products




Primary
Responsibility

(1)

Verify and
validate

work products



Primary
Responsibility

(1)

Verify and
validate

work products



Primary
Responsibility

(1)

Verify and
validate

work products



3.3

Skills


Team members

Role

Skills

Chen Zhuang


Primary Role:Requirement
Engineer.

Secon
dary Role:Feasibility
Analyst.

Current skills: C, C++, JAVA,
HTML, PHP, Microsoft
Project Plan



Required skills: UML coding,
cocomo II.

Yao
-
Sheng Tsai

Primary
Role:System/Software
Architect.


Secondary
Role:Operational Concept
Engineer.

Current

skills:

Java,

C,

C#,

HTML/J
S
,

AJAX,PHP,

MySQL,

ER model


Required skills:

UML
modeling, cocomoII

Bo Yang

Primary Role:Prototyper.
Secondary Role:Feasibility
Analyst.

Current skills: Java, C, C#,
HTML, Android SDK &
NDK. SSH frame.



Required skills :UML.
Prototy
ping tools, cocomo II.

Eder Figueroa

Primary Role:Project
Manager.


Secondary
Role:Requirement
Engineer.

Current skills:

Java programmer, UML
modeler, IOS programmer,
Enterprise Developer, MySql


Required skills:
UML coding

Sophia Wu

Primary Role:Life
cycle
planner .


Secondary
Role:System/software
Architect.

Current skills:ASP.NET,
VB.NET, C#.NET, HTML,
SQL server, Javascript


Required skills: COCOMO II,
JAVA

Doris Lam

Primary Role: Integrated
Independent Verification &
Validation . Secondary
Current skills: UML.SysMl,
Javam python, developing web
apps.

LCP_FCP_F12a_T05_V
3
.0




Version
3
.0


LCP_FCP_F12a_T05_V
3
.0

11

Version Date:
10
/
22
/12

Role: TB
A.



Required skills:
JUnit Test

TBA


Primary Role: Builder

Required skills: Java
programming, Spring, Struct,
Hibernate, HTML, JS


LCP_FCP_F12a_T05_V
3
.0




Version
3
.0


LCP_FCP_F12a_T05_V
3
.0

12

Version Date:
10
/
22
/12

4.

Approach


4.1

Monitoring and Control

For the FlowerSeeker proje
ct, the development team is using the progress report to track especially
which activities must to be completed for next week or iteration, the progress report also help to
monitor all risk that are happening for each week helping to take earlier actions o
n them.

4.1.1

Closed Loop Feedback Control

The group is using Google group as a tool to communicate all matter within the team members
and to share and keep organized all artifacts
. This tool is especially useful because we can send
messages for all team members

easily

4.1.2

Reviews

Weekly group review: This review is made in different times each week. The development team
discusses their problems and the work is evaluated and prioritized


IIV&V: By the den student, all artifacts are review and bugs released for each o
ne of them. This is
important for a neutral validation of the artifacts


WinToWin: Negotiations and review in which all values from the SCS. Also help to estimate and
prioritize requirements to be done
















LCP_FCP_F12a_T05_V
3
.0




Version
3
.0


LCP_FCP_F12a_T05_V
3
.0

13

Version Date:
10
/
22
/12

4.2


Methods, Tools and Facilities


Tools

Usage

Provider

Balsamiq

This tool helps to create fast
prototypes by the developers
along with the client. This is
especially useful for
brainstorming or concept
clarification

C
orner bistro


Demo version


Winbook

Help to set up all win to win
condit
ion with all success
critical stakeholders. Also to
estimate and prioritize
requirements

USC

BugZilla

Help to keep track the bug in
the development life cycle

USC

Visual Paradigm

Tool use to create all different
UML diagram need to reflect
requirements

and behaviors of
the system

USC





LCP_FCP_F12a_T05_V
3
.0




Version
3
.0


LCP_FCP_F12a_T05_V
3
.0

14

Version Date:
10
/
22
/12

5.

Resources

-

Estimated CSCI577a Effort :
6

team members at
10

hrs/week for 12 weeks

-

Total estimated effort
:5.25PM

-

Budget information
: estimate budget $3000

-

Project duration
: 12weeks

-

Component modul
es in your development

project
: Payment, rank & review, tracking
order, searching and user management.

-

Programming language used
: JAVA

Table
7
: COCOMOII Scale Driver

Scale Driver

Value

Rationale

PREC

Nominal

Our project is based on the concept of combin
ing social network,
ecommerce and online flower shopping, each system seems familiar for
people, but not familiar with the composite system.

FLEX

Low

The most modules in our project is not easy to be changed, but some
modules is still
changeable
.

RESL

No
minal

Some modules have to be concerned about the security issue, i.e.
payment system
,
which is a big risk for our system. If our payment system
crashed then the users


privacy can

t be protected.

TEAM

High

A
ll of our team members have same goal to help o
ur client to build up this
system perfectly that every team member helps each other whenever
some other team members have problem with project. And everyone try to
meet up to discuss the project as often as possible.

PMAT

Nominal

The development team foll
ows ICSM guidelines, which is compatible to
CMMI level 2 maturity level.


Figure

3
:
COCOMO II
Scale Factors


LCP_FCP_F12a_T05_V
3
.0




Version
3
.0


LCP_FCP_F12a_T05_V
3
.0

15

Version Date:
10
/
22
/12

Table
8
: COCOMOII Cost Driver

Cost Driver

Value

Rationale

RELY

High

Due to payment module need
well protection that the
reliability

of software is pretty important, or it may cause high
financial loss.

DATA

Nominal

The database of payment module is only for storage the
account number and payment history, which doesn

t need too
much space of databas
e.

DOCU

Nominal

The document for payment module should be exactly match
to life cycle.

CPLX

High

In payment module, we will use o
perations at physical I/O
level

to implement our project and some
distributed
processing

RUSE

Low

Due to our system is a bra
nd new idea in this industry that
the possibility of reusable is pretty low.

TIME

Nominal

T
his module doesn

t spend too much execution time.

STOR

Nominal

The payment module doesn

t need to have a large storage to
store all data that there

has minor
stora
ge constraint.

PVOL

Low

For well protect all the data in payment module, we should
check is there has any problem in software frequently.

ACAP

Low

Our analysts don

t have too much experience in analysis, so
they are learning during our project.

PCAP

Hi
gh

Five of six team members have experience in the
programming language that we are going to use in our
project.

PCON

Low

Three

of
six

team members
are not going

to

take

CSCI577b.

APEX

Low

There

s only one team member has little experience in
developing
the payment system, and others don

t have any
experience in developing payment system.

LTEX

Nominal

Five of six team members have many experiences in the
writing JAVA, which is the programming language we are
going to use for our project.

PLEX

Nominal

E
very team member has little knowledge of understanding
how to make the platform more powerful.

TOOL

Nominal

I
n payment module, we need to use some other software
tools not only do edit or debug, but it

s not mature.

SITE

High

Two

of
Six

team members are
on campus; only two team
members are in a different city.











LCP_FCP_F12a_T05_V
3
.0




Version
3
.0


LCP_FCP_F12a_T05_V
3
.0

16

Version Date:
10
/
22
/12

Figure

4
:
COCOMO II EAF
-

payment









6. Iteration Plan

6.1 Plan

<< Provide a high
-
level overview of the content of the given iteration. Indicate which Life

cycle
milestones will be addressed. >>

6.1.1 Capabilities to be implemented

<< For the milestone identified above, identify the capabilities that will be implemented in the
upcoming iteration. Identify the features, requirements or use

cases that are bein
g developed
(implemented, tested,
etc.
) for this
iteration.

Each component should be accounted for i
n at least

one iteration. All requirements should be implemented and t
ested (or re
-
negotiated) by the
completion of all the iterations. Be mindful of impl
eme
ntation dependencies.
Document
complex dependencies and communicate them to the appropriate development staff. >>

LCP_FCP_F12a_T05_V
3
.0




Version
3
.0


LCP_FCP_F12a_T05_V
3
.0

17

Version Date:
10
/
22
/12

Table
9
:
Construction iteration capabilities to be implemented

ID

Capability

Description

Priority

Iteration

< ID >

< Capability >

< comments >

<value>

<value>






6.1.2 Capabilities to be tested

<< For the milestone identified above, identify the capabilities that will be tested in the
upcoming iteration.

Identify the software features and combinations of software

features to be tested this iteration.
This may also include non
-
functional requirements or extra
-
functional requirements, such as
performance, portability, and so forth.

Additionally you may need to test every requirement listed in the
WinWin Agreements

DC
package, non
-
requirement component features such as COTS capabilities and quality, API
functionality, etc. >>

Table
10
:
Construction iteration capabilities to be
tested

ID

Capability

Description

Priority

Iteration

< ID >

< Capa
bility >

< comments >

<value>

<value>







6.1.3 Capabilities not to be tested

<< Identify notable features, and significant combinations of features, which will not be tested
this iteration and why (e.g. a given feature uses a feature which will be imp
lemented in following
iteration). >>

6.1.4 CCD Preparation Plans

<< Identify the clients and other users who will be involved in the Core Capability Drive
-
through, the usage scenarios that it will support, and the specific CCD preparation plans and
milest
ones. These may include

-

user context
-
setting

-

site preparation dry runs,

-

feedback forms, and

-

CCD risk management plans. >>

LCP_FCP_F12a_T05_V
3
.0




Version
3
.0


LCP_FCP_F12a_T05_V
3
.0

18

Version Date:
10
/
22
/12

6.2 Iteration Assessment

6.2.1 Capabilities Implemented, Tested, and Results

<<
Describes,

in brief, the capabilities that were im
plemented and the test results.

The
capabilities implemented and tested do not necessarily need to match the ones listed in section
6.1 because some capabilities may have been pushed to the next iteration. >>

Table
11
: Capabilities
implemented, tested, and results

ID

Capability

Test Case

Test Results

If fail, why?

< ID >

< Capability >

< TC
-
XX
>

Pass/Fail

< comments >







6.2.2 Core Capabilities Drive
-
Through Results

<<
Briefly summarize the feedback you received from

your

clien
t(s).

You

need

to

be

specific


enough

to

cover

the

critical

capabilities

or

scenarios

that

were
discussed,

demoed,

or

shown.

Your

descriptions

MUST,

but

not

limited

to,

cover

the

following

areas:



Positive
feedbacks



Improvements needed/suggested



Changes to

be considered (Reprioritized capabilities, requirements, GUI, etc.)



Risks (New risks introduced, risks mitigated, etc.)

Note:
Make

sure

to

be

specific

to

the

capabilities

shown/demonstrated/driven
-
through.

Simply
stating

that

the

clients

liked

the

capabil
ities

is

not

sufficient.

>>

6.3 Adherence to Plan

<< Describe how well the iteration ran according to plan. Was it on budget and on time? Is there
any uncertainty in the Software Development Status? Provide some insight to avoid mistakes for
future iterat
ions. >>