SA re defined

From UG

Revision as of 17:50, 26 November 2010 (edit) Alex (Talk | contribs) (→Exemplary specs) ← Older edit		Revision as of 19:11, 26 November 2010 (edit) (undo) Alex (Talk | contribs) (→Agreements) Newer edit →
Line 14:		Line 14:
	:* point out on missing elements		:* point out on missing elements
	:* help them finalize Business Requirements		:* help them finalize Business Requirements
		+	:* provide brief additional technical information required for developers
	* '''No ZUL'''		* '''No ZUL'''

---

Revision as of 19:11, 26 November 2010

Contents 1 To 2 Summary 3 Agreements 4 Exemplary specs 4.1 Non Shipment billing component 4.2 Air Status EDI 4.3 CT Records Per Client Company (Web Portal) 4.4 Visibility Redesign 4.5 KPIs for OpsTruck phase 1

To

Systems Analysts

Summary

Dev Team expressed concerns to me about what SAs put into wiki spec. To address them we agreed to the following.

Agreements

• Main role of SA

It is in most cases to:

• receive and review Business Requirements from BA,
• point out on missing elements
• help them finalize Business Requirements
• provide brief additional technical information required for developers

• No ZUL

No zul code should be created by SA. Reasons:

a) time consuming;

b) UIs should be created by developers

• No mock-up

Same reasons as above

• UI/functionality prototype

a) Due to changes above UI and functionality can be presented for review AFTER it was coded on Demo server. This is replacing a mechanism of creating/presenting UI mock ups.

b) in some cases UI mock ups will be used. Examples: in Design Ideas section; in pdf based proposals to Clients

• SA Notes

Section "Detailed Design will be replaced" with "SA Notes"

• Related specs must be linked

• Keep it simple

• First things first

Explain most important things first... then stop. If you have more time say more.

• Exemplary specs

Create a list of specs that comply to the new standard. See #Exemplary specs

• Impact on existing code

SA should state in SA Notes section what impact will have proposed change on existing components if any (reports, etc)

Exemplary specs

Non Shipment billing component

• wiki: Non Shipment billing component
• Module Owner (MO): Karen
• Authors: Tracie (BA) and Alex (SA)
• score: A+
• comments:
  • Kostya: Carefully read this spec. I like it very much: it is short, clear and has everything that is required.

Air Status EDI

• wiki: Air Status EDI
• Module Owner (MO): Simon and Marc
• Authors: Tracie (BA) and Alex (SA)
• score: TBD
• comments:
  • Alex: SA Notes section possibly too detailed. When do we pass this task to developer? What is the role of SA? Should he discuss XML design specifics with Descartes here or it is a developers job?

CT Records Per Client Company (Web Portal)

• wiki: CT Records Per Client Company (Web Portal)
• Module Owner (MO): Simon
• Authors: Tracie (BA) and Alex (SA)
• score: TBD
• comments:

Visibility Redesign

• wiki: Visibility Redesign
• Module Owner (MO): Simon and Marc
• Authors: Alex (BA) and Alex (SA)
• score: TBD
• comments:

KPIs for OpsTruck phase 1

• wiki: KPIs for OpsTruck phase 1
• Module Owner (MO): Simon, Marc, Bill (Arden)
• Authors: Alex (BA) and Alex (SA)
• score: TBD
• comments: