MOSP sprint 2006

From DaVinci

• Bad Things:
  • Didn't start on time
  • Not use enough graphics
  • Didn't finish on time
  • Didn't discuss about the process specifically
  • Didn't have slides to cover the future plan of the next semester
  • Didn't discuss a lot of the architecture
  • Missed notion of the architecture; "when will you start?"
  • Missed master plan to build it; don't know where you're going in the long haul; could't get the sense of progress; when and how will you have the 'big picture'?
  • Team seems to be behind in requirement elicitation, the approach to address the problem?
  • Spent too much time on project background
  • "I do not understand what their system does." Where did your component fit in their system?
  • Why are "good things" good things? "
  • Requirements, the impression is that you're doing the right things, but should have covered more ground at this point.
  • Could have an OSATE screenshot showing a hello-world kind of design, just to make it more concrete to the audience
  • Could have a timeline graph showing sprints just like the one you presented to clients at the end of (if not mistaken) sprint 3
  • You guys didn't demonstrate a grasp of the architecture on one side and of the big picture plan on the other. You'll be asked about that in the EOSP.
  • Find ways to engage audience.
  • Be able to clearly show if we are making progress
  • Need to include in our presentations items that imply/show we are following our process

• Good Things:
  • Good coverage of project scope
  • Summary of progress on commitment
  • Answer questions adequately
  • Good backup slides
  • Had an ok Q&A session
  • All the team was here for the presentation.
  • Continuity from previous EOSP
  • Adequate understanding of business drives
  • Pretty good job at describing architectural drivers