Commit 2123ebbd2f8abac4a6a5ef40c7106c4d8f85c022

Authored by Melissa Wen
1 parent 7e3e225b

[oss-2018] small format fix

Showing 1 changed file with 80 additions and 76 deletions   Show diff stats
icse2018/content/06-results.tex
... ... @@ -57,9 +57,9 @@ Data from Gitlab shows 775 issues were opened and 4658 comments were made in the
57 57 repository that versioned the platform (without considering the software
58 58 repositories that integrated the platform) within the SPB platform. The issues
59 59 were created by 59 different authors (8 MPOG representatives), and commented by
60   -64 different users (9 MPOG users). Of the 84 created issues with greater
61   -interaction (number of comments >= 10), ~43\% are authored by one of MPOG
62   -representatives. Students said the main communication ways used to interacted
  60 +64 different users (9 MPOG users). {\~43\%} of the 84 issues with higher level
  61 +of interaction (10 or more comments) are authored by one of MPOG staff.
  62 +Students said the main communication ways used to interacte
63 63 with software communities were: IRC (86.5\%); Mailing list (73\%); Issues
64 64 (67.6\%). The main means of communication between senior developers and
65 65 students was IRC (100\%), Mailing list (100\%), Videoconference (100\%) and
... ... @@ -69,21 +69,22 @@ staff ratifies the main interaction spaces between teams: "We interacted a lot
69 69 with mailing lists and chatting, sometimes with gitlab within the line of
70 70 development."
71 71 %
72   -\textbf{Benefits}
  72 +\paragraph{Benefits}
73 73  
74 74 \begin{itemize}
75   -\item \textit{Confidence in developed code}
76   -\subitem One of the gov-side interviewees said "Everything was validated, we
  75 + \setlength\itemsep{1em}
  76 + \item \textit{Confidence in developed code}
  77 + \subitem One of the gov-side interviewees said "Everything was validated, we
77 78 tested the features and the project was developed inside the platform, so that
78 79 the feature was validated in the development of the software itself. Our team at
79 80 MPOG, used the development and communication tools of the platform itself. From
80 81 the moment we installed it, and began to use it for development, this validation
81 82 was constant. We felt confident about the features"
82   -\item \textit{Transparency and efficiency in communication}
83   -\subitem Undegraduate student response: "We always had an open channel for
  83 + \item \textit{Transparency and efficiency in communication}
  84 + \subitem Undegraduate student response: "We always had an open channel for
84 85 conversations / interactions, whether it was the project issues, the IRC
85 86 channel, via Whatsapp, etc."
86   -\subitem MPOG: "I think the communication was excellent, it was comprehensive,
  87 + \subitem MPOG: "I think the communication was excellent, it was comprehensive,
87 88 instantaneous and effective. We asked a question, a question, and very quickly
88 89 it was answered. Communication goes far beyond that, you communicate to everyone
89 90 in the project everything that was happening. We did not have issue related to
... ... @@ -92,17 +93,17 @@ was all public and did not pollute our mailbox. You wanted to know something,
92 93 could go there and look at what was happening. We also had instant chatting,
93 94 where the team stayed online, working connected. We had a quick access to the
94 95 team. This makes all the difference in a project."
95   -\item \textit{Monitoring of interactions among students, senior developers and
  96 + \item \textit{Monitoring of interactions among students, senior developers and
96 97 public servants by coordinators}
97   -\subitem MPOG: "The leader himself informed us who was doing something, then we
  98 + \subitem MPOG: "The leader himself informed us who was doing something, then we
98 99 talked directly to that student [..] But this interaction was not very frequent,
99 100 sometimes we would ask something on the list and the coordinator would answer
100 101 first."
101   -\item \textit{Increase interaction between development team and contract
  102 + \item \textit{Increase interaction between development team and contract
102 103 management team}
103   -\subitem MPOG: "There was a lot of evolution, a lot of communication via Gitlab"
104   -\item \textit{Organically documentation and records generation}
105   -\subitem MPOG: "For me it was a lot of learning, there is a lot of things
  104 + \subitem MPOG: "There was a lot of evolution, a lot of communication via Gitlab"
  105 + \item \textit{Organically documentation and records generation}
  106 + \subitem MPOG: "For me it was a lot of learning, there is a lot of things
106 107 documented in the e-mails and also there in the portal itself of what happened
107 108 in the project. At any moment we can go there and see how it worked, how the
108 109 person did, and manages to salvage those good points."
... ... @@ -111,31 +112,32 @@ person did, and manages to salvage those good points."
111 112 \subsubsection{Continuos Delivery}
112 113  
113 114 \begin{itemize}
114   - \item Creating DevOps Team
115   - \item Defining continuous delivery pipeline
116   - \item DevOps team periodically going to the ministry to help deploy each version
  115 + \item \textit{Creating DevOps Team}
  116 + \item \textit{Defining continuous delivery pipeline}
  117 + \item \textit{DevOps team periodically going to the ministry to help deploy each version}
117 118 \end{itemize}
118 119  
119   -\textbf{Benefits}
  120 +\paragraph{Benefits}
120 121  
121 122 \begin{itemize}
122   -\item \textit{Increase government confidence for collaborative projects with the
  123 + \setlength\itemsep{1em}
  124 + \item \textit{Increase government confidence for collaborative projects with the
123 125 university}
124   -\subitem MPOG: "At first the government staff had a bias that universities did
  126 + \subitem MPOG: "At first the government staff had a bias that universities did
125 127 not deliver and we overcame that bias in the course of the project. We deliver a
126 128 lot and with quality. Today, I think that if we had paid the same amount for a
127 129 company, it would not have done what was delivered and with the quality that was
128 130 delivered with the price that was paid."
129   -\item \textit{Motivate teams}
130   -\subitem {81.1\%} of students think new versions released in production motivated
  131 + \item \textit{Motivate teams}
  132 + \subitem {81.1\%} of students think new versions released in production motivated
131 133 them during the project
132   -\subitem {75\%} of senior developers think new versions released in production
  134 + \subitem {75\%} of senior developers think new versions released in production
133 135 motivated them during the project
134   -\subitem {81\%} of students think the presence of a specific DevOps team was
  136 + \subitem {81\%} of students think the presence of a specific DevOps team was
135 137 necessary for the project
136   -\item \textit{Transfer of knowledge about DevOps and Continuous Deliveries from
  138 + \item \textit{Transfer of knowledge about DevOps and Continuous Deliveries from
137 139 the academic team to the government infrastructure team}
138   -\subitem MPOG: "I only noticed positive aspects in the delivery. I think in the
  140 + \subitem MPOG: "I only noticed positive aspects in the delivery. I think in the
139 141 interaction, we had a lot of support to be able to deploy. From the time that
140 142 the version was mature, which had already been tested in the UnB test
141 143 environment and was ready to be put into production, we had a great agility to
... ... @@ -143,22 +145,22 @@ release in production. Then in the course of the project we realized that the
143 145 infrastructure team [of MPOG] started to trust the UnB team a lot. Because, for
144 146 you to put software in production in government, there is a whole process
145 147 behind. The government has much of this security issue."
146   -\subitem MPOG: "If there was anything stopping the business from working, the
  148 + \subitem MPOG: "If there was anything stopping the business from working, the
147 149 software working inside, we would ask the seniors for support so we could
148 150 investigate that, and the infrastructure team was also instructed to prioritize
149 151 it. So when it came to an impasse, the teams were all together, both from within
150 152 MPOG as well as senior developers and other UnB developers to unlock, to find
151 153 the problem."
152   -\item \textit{Align the university and government teams pace in the execution of
  154 + \item \textit{Align the university and government teams pace in the execution of
153 155 the activities}
154   -\subitem MPOG: "In the beginning, infrastructure personnel were not accustomed
  156 + \subitem MPOG: "In the beginning, infrastructure personnel were not accustomed
155 157 to deliveries so fast. They had to adapt to this pace. The portal of the SPB
156 158 before the project was not there [in the MPOG infrastructure], it was in another
157 159 place, they did not have that dynamics there. But what they asked for UnB (some
158 160 configuration, installation manual, how to install everything inside) was
159 161 requested and delivered."
160   -\item \textit{Improve translation from one development process to the other}
161   -\subitem MPOG: "We had an overview at the strategic level, but when we went down
  162 + \item \textit{Improve translation from one development process to the other}
  163 + \subitem MPOG: "We had an overview at the strategic level, but when we went down
162 164 to the level of functionality we had this difficulty to do the planning of the
163 165 release every four months. But in the end, I think this has not been a problem,
164 166 because a project you are delivering, the results are going to production, the
... ... @@ -175,31 +177,32 @@ undergraduate student as coach and at least one senior developer}
175 177 \item \textit{Hiring professionals from the IT market for face-to-face or remote work, specialists in the software components}
176 178 \end{itemize}
177 179  
178   -\textbf{Benefits}
  180 +\paragraph{Benefits}
179 181  
180 182 \begin{itemize}
181   -\item \textit{Help to conciliate development processes and decision-making}
182   -\subitem {62,5\%} of senior developers believe they have helped MPOG staff to more clearly express their requests
183   -\subitem {87,5\%} of seniors agreed with the project development process. For 37.5\% this process was little similar to their previous experiences, for the others there was a certain similarity.
184   -\subitem {62,5\%} of seniors did not understand MPOG's project management process. {50\%} of them believe their project productivity was affected by MPOG's project management process.
185   -\subitem Senior Dev: "I think my main contribution was to have balanced the relations between the MPOG staff and the UnB team"
186   -\subitem Senior Dev: "When I entered the project, the client had a disproportionate view of how to make explicit the requirements. They were still talking about use cases and were extremely concerned about validation processes and acceptance of these documents."
187   -\subitem MPOG: "You had the reviewers, who were the original developers of the software, that gave you confidence and confidence in the code."
  183 + \setlength\itemsep{1em}
  184 + \item \textit{Help to conciliate development processes and decision-making}
  185 + \subitem {62,5\%} of senior developers believe they have helped MPOG staff to more clearly express their requests
  186 + \subitem {87,5\%} of seniors agreed with the project development process. For 37.5\% this process was little similar to their previous experiences, for the others there was a certain similarity.
  187 + \subitem {62,5\%} of seniors did not understand MPOG's project management process. {50\%} of them believe their project productivity was affected by MPOG's project management process.
  188 + \subitem Senior Dev: "I think my main contribution was to have balanced the relations between the MPOG staff and the UnB team"
  189 + \subitem Senior Dev: "When I entered the project, the client had a disproportionate view of how to make explicit the requirements. They were still talking about use cases and were extremely concerned about validation processes and acceptance of these documents."
  190 + \subitem MPOG: "You had the reviewers, who were the original developers of the software, that gave you confidence and confidence in the code."
188 191 %
189   -\item \textit{Create support and reference points for students, senior developers, and government staff}
190   -\subitem {89.1\%} of students believe that the presence of the leader was essential to the running of Sprint
191   -\subitem {87.5\%} of seniors believe that the presence of team leaders was essential for their interaction with the team
192   -\subitem MPOG: "It interacted more with the project coordinator and team coaches (noosfero, colab, visual identity). Interacted with coaches by mailing list, hangouts The reason was usually to elucidate requirements, to ask questions about requirements, to understand some functionality. "
193   -\subitem MPOG: "There was interaction with the other [non-coaches] because they also participated in the bi-weekly meetings (sprints), but it was more with coaches."
194   -\subitem MPOG: "Access to coaches was faster, because we were in much more interaction with leaders than with senior developers. Sometimes the coaches brought the question to the senior developers."
  192 + \item \textit{Create support and reference points for students, senior developers, and government staff}
  193 + \subitem {89.1\%} of students believe that the presence of the leader was essential to the running of Sprint
  194 + \subitem {87.5\%} of seniors believe that the presence of team leaders was essential for their interaction with the team
  195 + \subitem MPOG: "It interacted more with the project coordinator and team coaches (noosfero, colab, visual identity). Interacted with coaches by mailing list, hangouts The reason was usually to elucidate requirements, to ask questions about requirements, to understand some functionality. "
  196 + \subitem MPOG: "There was interaction with the other [non-coaches] because they also participated in the bi-weekly meetings (sprints), but it was more with coaches."
  197 + \subitem MPOG: "Access to coaches was faster, because we were in much more interaction with leaders than with senior developers. Sometimes the coaches brought the question to the senior developers."
195 198 %
196   -\item \textit{Transfer of knowledge from industry and FLOSS community to both academia and government}
197   -\subitem {62.5\%} of senior developers believe that they have collaborated in the relationship between the management and development processes of the two institutions
198   -\subitem {100\%} of the students we interviewed believe that working with senior developers was important during the project
199   -\subitem {91.\%} of students also believe that working with seniors was important for learning
200   -\subitem {75\%} of senior developers believe that 'Working in pairs with a senior' and 62.5% who 'Participate in joint review tasks' were the tasks with the involvement of them that most contributed to the evolution of students in the project.
201   -\subitem {75\%} of senior developers believe that in guiding a student, this knowledge was widespread among the other students on the team.
202   -\subitem MPOG: "On the side of UnB, what we perceived so strongly was that the project took a very big leap when the original developers of the software (the official software development) were hired in the case of Noosfero and Colab [..] Because they had a guide on how to develop things in the best way and were able to solve non-trivial problems and quickly "
  199 + \item \textit{Transfer of knowledge from industry and FLOSS community to both academia and government}
  200 + \subitem {62.5\%} of senior developers believe that they have collaborated in the relationship between the management and development processes of the two institutions
  201 + \subitem {100\%} of the students we interviewed believe that working with senior developers was important during the project
  202 + \subitem {91.\%} of students also believe that working with seniors was important for learning
  203 + \subitem {75\%} of senior developers believe that 'Working in pairs with a senior' and 62.5% who 'Participate in joint review tasks' were the tasks with the involvement of them that most contributed to the evolution of students in the project.
  204 + \subitem {75\%} of senior developers believe that in guiding a student, this knowledge was widespread among the other students on the team.
  205 + \subitem MPOG: "On the side of UnB, what we perceived so strongly was that the project took a very big leap when the original developers of the software (the official software development) were hired in the case of Noosfero and Colab [..] Because they had a guide on how to develop things in the best way and were able to solve non-trivial problems and quickly "
203 206 \end{itemize}
204 207  
205 208 %* Filtrar a comunicação por níveis de maturidade/experiência e responsabilidades
... ... @@ -207,35 +210,36 @@ undergraduate student as coach and at least one senior developer}
207 210  
208 211 \subsubsection{Bringing the government staff directly responsible for the project together with development team}
209 212 \begin{itemize}
210   -\item Biweekly meetings (planning and sprint review) in the development lab with the presence of government staff, team coaches and senior developers
211   -\item Discuss features under development directly on Gitlab Issue Tracker
212   -\item Only strategic decisions or bureaucratic issues involve the directors/secretaries
  213 +\item \textit{Biweekly meetings (planning and sprint review) in the development lab with the presence of government staff, team coaches and senior developers}
  214 +\item \textit{Discuss features under development directly on Gitlab Issue Tracker}
  215 +\item \textit{Only strategic decisions or bureaucratic issues involve the directors/secretaries}
213 216 \end{itemize}
214 217  
215   -\textbf{Benefits}
  218 +\paragraph{Benefits}
216 219  
217 220 \begin{itemize}
218   -\item \textit{Reduce communication misunderstood}
219   -\subitem MPOG: "That's when the project started, people [MPOG staff] did not participate in anything. The communication process was horrible."; "The [MPOG] coordinator did not help, he would say something and UnB would talk to another at the meeting and it was the biggest mess." About the direct dialogue between the academic team and MPOG staff (without the involvement of coordinators and / or directors) , she said "That's where things really started to move, that the communication of the project began to improve."
  221 + \setlength\itemsep{1em}
  222 + \item \textit{Reduce communication misunderstood}
  223 + \subitem MPOG: "That's when the project started, people [MPOG staff] did not participate in anything. The communication process was horrible."; "The [MPOG] coordinator did not help, he would say something and UnB would talk to another at the meeting and it was the biggest mess." About the direct dialogue between the academic team and MPOG staff (without the involvement of coordinators and / or directors) , she said "That's where things really started to move, that the communication of the project began to improve."
220 224 %
221   -\item \textit{Empathy between members on both sides}
222   -\subitem {72.9\%} of students believe that interacting with MPOG staff was important during the project
223   -\subitem Only 27\% of the students interviewed said they did not feel like attending meetings with MPOG employees
224   -\subitem MPOG: "You know people in person and it makes such a big difference because it causes empathy. You know what the person is going through on their side and she knows what we're going through on our side. So the next time you have a non-personal interaction (by mail, by list ...) I think it even facilitates, improves communication. You already know who that person is, it's not just a name. "
  225 + \item \textit{Empathy between members on both sides}
  226 + \subitem {72.9\%} of students believe that interacting with MPOG staff was important during the project
  227 + \subitem Only 27\% of the students interviewed said they did not feel like attending meetings with MPOG employees
  228 + \subitem MPOG: "You know people in person and it makes such a big difference because it causes empathy. You know what the person is going through on their side and she knows what we're going through on our side. So the next time you have a non-personal interaction (by mail, by list ...) I think it even facilitates, improves communication. You already know who that person is, it's not just a name. "
225 229 %
226   -\item \textit{Develop requirements closer to the expectations of both sides}
227   -\subitem {81.1 \%} of students believe that the participation of MPOG staff in planning and closing sprints was important for the development of the project
228   -\subitem {75.6 \%} of students believe that writing the requirements together with the MPOG staff was very important
229   -\subitem Undergrad student: "Joint planning and timely meetings were very important for understanding the needs of MPOG, and the interaction via SPB tools helped validate the tool as a development platform"
230   -\subitem Undergrad student: "Often they did not know what they really wanted, and they caused some delays in the development of sprints"
231   -\subitem Undergrad student: "A relationship of constant attempt to balance and negotiate. The client does not always know the impacts of their requests"
232   -\subitem MPOG: "I believe it was very positive, we also liked to go there, to interact with the team. I think it brought more unity, more integration into the project, because we went there, where people were working and they show what was done. I think they also liked to receive our feedback about what had been done by them.This interaction did not just made with the coordinator. I found it very important and very positive it. "
  230 + \item \textit{Develop requirements closer to the expectations of both sides}
  231 + \subitem {81.1 \%} of students believe that the participation of MPOG staff in planning and closing sprints was important for the development of the project
  232 + \subitem {75.6 \%} of students believe that writing the requirements together with the MPOG staff was very important
  233 + \subitem Undergrad student: "Joint planning and timely meetings were very important for understanding the needs of MPOG, and the interaction via SPB tools helped validate the tool as a development platform"
  234 + \subitem Undergrad student: "Often they did not know what they really wanted, and they caused some delays in the development of sprints"
  235 + \subitem Undergrad student: "A relationship of constant attempt to balance and negotiate. The client does not always know the impacts of their requests"
  236 + \subitem MPOG: "I believe it was very positive, we also liked to go there, to interact with the team. I think it brought more unity, more integration into the project, because we went there, where people were working and they show what was done. I think they also liked to receive our feedback about what had been done by them.This interaction did not just made with the coordinator. I found it very important and very positive it. "
233 237 %
234   -\item \textit{Improve understanding of collaborative development by MPOG staff}
235   -\subitem Undergrad student: "In the beginning the demands of MPOG were very 'orders from above', but according to the progress of the project, they understood better our work philosophy and became more open"
236   -\subitem MPOG: "During development we realized that the team that was developing also felt like the owner of the project felt involved not only a mere executor of an order. It was not a client relationship, it was a partnership relationship, so there was a lot of team suggestions to be put into the project. Sometimes these were put in for us to decide and sometimes not."
237   -\subitem MPOG: "I think it was easy, I think the team was aligned. In addition to being aligned, these items that, for example, were not priorities and became priorities, were, in a sense, brought with some arguments from the team. So the team was able to argue and succeed in showing that it was important, that it needed to be prioritized, and I think the team was able to present the arguments well for some of the priorities that happened during the process."
  238 + \item \textit{Improve understanding of collaborative development by MPOG staff}
  239 + \subitem Undergrad student: "In the beginning the demands of MPOG were very 'orders from above', but according to the progress of the project, they understood better our work philosophy and became more open"
  240 + \subitem MPOG: "During development we realized that the team that was developing also felt like the owner of the project felt involved not only a mere executor of an order. It was not a client relationship, it was a partnership relationship, so there was a lot of team suggestions to be put into the project. Sometimes these were put in for us to decide and sometimes not."
  241 + \subitem MPOG: "I think it was easy, I think the team was aligned. In addition to being aligned, these items that, for example, were not priorities and became priorities, were, in a sense, brought with some arguments from the team. So the team was able to argue and succeed in showing that it was important, that it needed to be prioritized, and I think the team was able to present the arguments well for some of the priorities that happened during the process."
238 242 %
239   -\item \textit{Align the pace of both sides to execute activities}
240   -\subitem MPOG: "When we went there, I knew people and made that interaction more frequent, we also felt encouraged to validate faster and give faster feedback to the teams so they would not wait there. I knew they were waiting for our feedback and we were struggling to do it fast, because we ended a sprint and start another and not stop. We gave that feedback fast and they also gave quick feedback for any questions when they encountered a problem. That gave the project agility, things flowed faster and better. "
  243 + \item \textit{Align the pace of both sides to execute activities}
  244 + \subitem MPOG: "When we went there, I knew people and made that interaction more frequent, we also felt encouraged to validate faster and give faster feedback to the teams so they would not wait there. I knew they were waiting for our feedback and we were struggling to do it fast, because we ended a sprint and start another and not stop. We gave that feedback fast and they also gave quick feedback for any questions when they encountered a problem. That gave the project agility, things flowed faster and better. "
241 245 \end{itemize}
... ...