Merge branch 'master' of softwarepublico.gov.br:softwarepublico/articles

Paulo Meireles
2 parents 90070b77 5c521b48
Showing 1 changed file with 51 additions and 29 deletions Show diff stats
ieeeSW/releaseEng3/IEEE_ThemeIssue_ReleaseEng_CD.md
@@ -4,6 +4,24 @@ papersize: a4
 geometry: "left=1in,right=1.5in"
 ---
+## Authors
+
+__Diego Camarinha__ is a masters student at IME - The Institute of Mathematics and
+Statistics of the Sao Paulo University. His research interests include software
+engineering, computer networks and source code metrics. He worked for two years
+with the Brazilian federal government as a senior developer. Contact him at
+diegoamc@ime.usp.br.
+
+__Rodrigo Siqueira__ is a masters student at IME - The Institute of Mathematics and
+Statistics of the Sao Paulo University. His research interests include software
+engineering, operating system and computer architecture. He worked for two years
+with the Brazilian federal government as a coach and developer. Contact him at
+siqueira@ime.usp.br.
+
+__Melissa Wen__ is a software developer. She worked on SPB project as a senior developer and also served as professor of Computer Science at UFBA - The Federal University of Bahia. Her areas of interest include software engineering and open source software development. Contact her at melissa.srw@gmail.com .
+
+__Paulo Meirelles__ received his Ph.D. in Computer Science from the Institute of Mathematics and Statistics at the University of São Paulo. He is a full-time Professor at the University of Brasilia, and coordinated the new SPB Portal project. His research interest areas are: Free Software, Agile methods, Static analysis, and Source code metrics. Contact him at paulormm@ime.usp.br.
+
 ## Abstract
 For many software development teams, the first things that come to mind
@@ -28,11 +46,12 @@ government, but also to society as a whole. The government could reduce both
 the bureaucracy of using the same software in government agencies and the cost
 of developing similar software projects. The society gained a mechanism of
 transparency and collaboration, since anyone can check the government
-expenses on software and contribute to project communities. To achieve these
-goals, rather than writing everything from scratch, we decided to integrate
-several free software tools such as Noosfero (www.noosfero.org), Gitlab
-(www.gitlab.com), Mailman (www.gnu.org/software/mailman), Mezuro
-(www.mezuro.org), and Colab (www.github.com/colab).
+expenses on software (from information available on the SPB Portal) and
+contribute to project communities. To achieve these goals, rather than writing
+everything from scratch, we decided to integrate several free software tools
+such as Noosfero (www.noosfero.org), Gitlab (www.gitlab.com), Mailman
+(www.gnu.org/software/mailman), Mezuro (www.mezuro.org), and Colab
+(www.github.com/colab).
 The project started in a presidential election year and everyone involved was
 under pressure to show results. Even with the re-election of the Brazilian
@@ -62,10 +81,10 @@ with professors, master students, professional designers and senior developers
 from the Brazilian free software community. Undergraduate students received a
 scholarship and, for most of them, this R&D project was their first
 professional experience. Senior developers and master students had two
-important contributions to the project: transfer knowledge to undergraduate
-students and more complex tasks. Finally, professors were responsible for
-interacting with the Brazilian government and controlling political pressures
-applied to the project.
+important contributions to the project: to transfer knowledge to undergraduate
+students and to deal with more complex tasks. Finally, professors were
+responsible for interacting with the Brazilian government and controlling
+political pressures applied to the project.
 Moreover, we needed to communicate with two independent groups of government
 representatives. Requirement analysts were real representatives of the
@@ -83,12 +102,12 @@ the government expectations and to provide quick response to their requests,
 which were influenced most of the time by the uncertainties of the project's
 continuity. We believed we would keep the project alive, even in a politically
 unstable and technically complex scenario.  For this reason, we focused on
-automating the deploy process; for instance, one of our senior
-developers created a Chef-Server (www.chef.io/chef) front-end tool called Chake
-(www.gitlab.com/terceiro/chake) to help us manage the multiple hosts needed for
-the project. We also formed a specific team dedicated to the deployment
-process. This team was responsible for maturing our CD pipeline, giving us
-confidence and agility to comply with government requirements.
+automating the deploy process; for instance, one of our senior developers
+created a tool called Chake (www.gitlab.com/terceiro/chake) to help us manage
+multiple hosts without the need for a Chef-Server (www.chef.io/chef). We also
+formed a specific team dedicated to the deployment process. This team was
+responsible for maturing our CD pipeline, giving us confidence and agility to
+comply with government requirements.
 In this report, we describe our CD pipeline and how it improved our delivery
 performance. Continuous Delivery made us adaptable for all requested changes
@@ -113,18 +132,17 @@ more new code.
 The SPB portal consists of more than 10 integrated software projects and each
 of them, as well as the entire platform, had to be tested. These software
-components had their own test suite, maintained and expanded by the development
-team. Communication between all components is orchestrated by Colab, a systems
-integration platform for web applications based on a plugins architecture.
-Therefore, specific plugins have been developed for each portal software
-component, such as Gitlab and Mailman. Each plugin had its own test suite
-and this set also worked as integration test.
-
-Both unit and integration tests provided us the performace and security needed
-to guarantee the stability for components and the platform. If any test suite failed,
-by either a test error or coverage reduction below a certain threshold, the
-pipeline was stopped. Only when all tests pass, the pipeline proceeded to the step of
-preparing the release.
+components have their own test suite. Communication between all components is
+orchestrated by Colab, a systems integration platform for web applications based
+on a plugins architecture. Therefore, specific plugins were developed for
+each portal software component, such as Gitlab and Mailman. Each plugin has its
+own test suite and this set also worked as integration tests.
+
+Both unit and integration tests provided us the performance and security needed
+to guarantee the stability for components and the platform. If any test suite
+failed, by either a test error or coverage reduction below a certain threshold,
+the pipeline stopped. Only when all tests passed, the pipeline proceeded to the
+step of preparing the release.
 ### Preparing a New Release
@@ -177,7 +195,7 @@ as part of the next step in the pipeline.
 After we deployed a new SPB Portal version in the VE, the government
 agents were responsible for checking features and bug fixes required by them. If
-the requirement analysts identified a problem, they would notified the developers via
+the requirement analysts identified a problem, they would notify the developers via
 comments on the SPB Portal's issue tracker. The problems were fixed and the
 pipeline restarted from scratch. If everything was validated, we moved forward.
@@ -206,7 +224,7 @@ leader resulted in new requirements, most of them motivated by political
 needs. These constant changes in requirements and priorities caused discomfort
 between the government and the development team. For
 example, the government leader required a complete layout change because he suddenly decided to make a marketing campaign about the new
-SPB portal. Thus the government would use undelivered requirements as a means to justify the
+SPB portal. In future meetings, the government would use undelivered requirements as a means to justify the
 lack of financial support, which was already approved in the first place. We believed that if we took too
 long to attend their demands, the project would end. CD helped us keep the
 production environment up-to-date, even with partial versions of a feature. That
@@ -302,6 +320,10 @@ to part of the infrastructure. More research is required on development protocol
 policies to improve the relation between industry and government, specially
 regarding CD.
+## Acknowledgements
+
+We thank our colleagues, Lucas Kanashiro and Rafael Manzo, and this article's reviewers.
+
 ## References
 1. G. Booch, A. W. Brown, "Collaborative Development Environments", in Advances in Computers, vol. 59, 2003, pp. 1–27.