 |
Page History
...
What went well
| Description | Author |
|---|---|
| Loaded a very complex transform into GEN3 successfully. Were able to merge two source files into one transform successfully. Were able to successfully update the data model for new and modified terms | Kevin |
| User story review meeting between all involved parties (BA, Developers, QA) was very informative. Opened a line of communication between all teams to ask questions and get clarification about the requirements and wireframes in preparation for testing. | Ann |
| Communications between the QA/Dev teams went well | Afag |
| Working with Kevin/Claire went well and property updates to the model were not as bad as previously thought. Wireframes are looking great. | Phil |
| Lots of work was accomplished and it looks really good. | Ye |
| Despite the quickly changing requirements of the wireframes, they look great. Lots of work got done on both the front-end and the back-end and it looks good. | Matt |
| Neo4J training was really beneficial. Now confident on how to write queries. | Sri Kiran |
| The enthusiasm of the team to embrace new learning is really motivating/encouraging. | Amit |
| Integration between the front-end team and the back-end team went well. Jabber/Slack is working well. | Ming |
| Working with the Dev Team is going well - I feel welcome and part of the team. | Vincent |
| Communications with the QA team are good. | Yizhen |
| Communication among the Front-end team is going very well. FE/BE integration also good. Neo4J training was a nice addition. | Ajay |
| Learning from the team and establishing good relationships. | Siva |
| Team coming together really well. Bringing up issues and taking feedback as professionals. The wireframes are good enough from ICDC to be shown as a first pass for CTN - a real plus. | Todd |
What could have gone better?
| Description | Author |
|---|---|
| We need to pay more attention to the spelling in the data model, as well as the transform. We wasted some time with some spelling mistakes | Kevin |
| Tickets were not very descriptive and detailed. Changes need to be noted and description should be updated. Acceptance criteria should also be added to tickets. | Ann |
| Requirements need to be better specified to be testable. E.g., the dashboard header ticket needs to have good requirements before being passed to QA for testing. | Afag |
| Editing the wireframes needs to be more nimble and in real-time. | Phil |
| Need to improve communication between Dev and QA teams, Devs need to do unit testing and update the tickets with acceptance criteria. | Ye |
| Need to stay up to date on ticket status and keep the communication flowing between all team members. | Matt |
| Need some clarity on the timeline/requirements for CTN - will talk to Siva. | Sri Kiran |
| Sprint coordination, planning and preparation needs to improve. Ensure Github is being used to store scripts. All environments should be identical. Need to improve interactions with NCI Cloud One. | Amit |
| It seems hard to close a ticket before the end of the sprint sometimes. Perhaps the tickets are too big and need to be split. | Ming |
| Issues with NCI Cloud One have slowed things down - anticipated already working in the Dev environment. | Vincent |
| Need to include more test cases and how to test in the tickets. | Yizhen |
| Need to break down the tickets into smaller bits. E.g., "build 3 components" should be 3 "build component" tickets. Create a template for a ticket in Jira that would specify all sections needing to be completed. | Ajay |
| Process improvements specified above by others. | Siva |
| Need to address process improvement issues. | Todd |
Tickets
| Jira | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
