Ajustes na parte do case study

Rodrigo Siqueira de Melo
1 parent fff0a013
Showing 1 changed file with 26 additions and 17 deletions Show diff stats
oss2018/content/03-methods.tex
@@ -23,27 +23,32 @@ repository.
 \subsection{The case study}
 The project to evolve the SPB portal was a partnership between government and
-academia held between 2014 and 2016 \cite{meirelles2017spb}. The old version of
-SPB suffered from maintenance problems and design-reality gaps. In this sense,
-The Ministry of Planning (MPOG) decided to join the University of Brasília
-(UnB) and the University of São Paulo (USP) to develop a new platform. This
-platform had as its primary requirement to be based on existing FLOSS projects
-and integrate multiple systems into one, providing the end user with a unified
-experience.
+academia held between 2014 and 2016  \cite{meirelles2017spb}. The old version
+of SPB suffered from maintenance problems and design-reality gaps. The new
+platform had the primary requirement to be based on existing FLOSS projects and
+integrate multiple systems into one, providing the end user with a unified
+experience. The reasons behind these requirements are the attempt to reduce
+costs by taking the upstream updates and internal political issues. In this
+sense, The Ministry of Planning (MPOG) decided to join the University of
+Brasília (UnB) and the University of São Paulo (USP) to develop a new platform.
 In short, the SPB portal evolved into a Collaborative Development Environment
-(CDE) \cite{booch2003}. It was a novelty in the context of the Brazilian
+(CDE)\cite{booch2003}. It was a novelty in the context of the Brazilian
 government, due to the technologies employed and its diverse features. The
 portal includes social networking, mailing lists, version control system, and
 source code quality monitoring. All software is integrated using a
-system-of-systems framework \cite{meirelles2017spb}.
+system-of-systems framework \cite{meirelles2017spb}.  These characteristics led
+the project to interact with different FLOSS projects.
 The platform development took place at the Advanced Laboratory of Production,
 Research, and Innovation in Software Engineering (LAPPIS/UnB) and the FLOSS
-Competence Center at USP (CCSL/USP). Undergraduate interns, IT professionals and
-professors formed a partially distributed development team. While interns and
-professors worked in-person, most IT professionals worked remotely. Their
-activities followed the workflow of biweekly sprints and 4-month releases.
+Competence Center at USP (CCSL/USP). It is important to highlight that LAPPIS
+was selected to lead SPB project for geographical reasons (the laboratory is
+close to the MPOG) and due to its know-how on FLOSS communities. Undergraduate
+interns, IT professionals and professors formed a partially distributed
+development team. While interns and professors worked in-person, most IT
+professionals worked remotely. Their activities followed the workflow of
+biweekly sprints and 4-month releases.
 On the managerial aspect, at the project
 beginning, the collaboration management and strategic discussions happened only
@@ -84,10 +89,14 @@ between the internal management processes and differences in pace and goals of
 each institution were compromising the platform development. To improve the
 project management process and reducing the mismatching between government and
 academia, professors, with the senior developers' collaboration, incrementally
-employed a set of best practices based on FLOSS and agile values. Throughout
-the project, the development leaders made decisions in a non-systematic way to
-promote the usage of these techniques. In this paper, we analyzed and codified
-these decisions and how they favored the collaboration progress.
+employed a set of best practices based on FLOSS and agile values.
+
+The government investment in FLOSS projects, the geographical advantages, the
+novelty of the SPB project in Brazillian government, and the system-of-system
+characteristic made SPB as a perfect case study. Throughout the project, the
+development leaders made decisions in a non-systematic way to promote the usage
+of FLOSS and agile techniques. In this paper, we analyzed and codified these
+decisions and how they favored the collaboration progress.
 \subsection{Survey, Interview and Data Collection}