Difference between revisions of "COSMOS PostMortem 1.0"

Revision as of 12:57, 18 November 2008

This page captures the thoughts of the community on what went well in COSMOS 1.0 and what needs to be improved on going forward. Note that we don't need an entry in all of the categories below, and please create a new category if that makes sense.

Meetings

1. Meeting chair also takes the meeting minutes
   1. It slows down the meeting when the chair says, "Hang on a second, let me note that down." Proposed from David Whiteman: rotating meeting minute taker. Everyone has a turn.

Development process

Review and discuss the blog post discussing the Eclipse process and whether it is truly Agile. Most of it is really dealing with whether the process is enforced. Let's look at our project and see if we follow all of the 10 guidelines listed, and whether we need to change anything to help with that.

Legal

1. Adding dependencies on 3rd party open source
   1. New process: When Development wants to add a dependency on 3rd party open source, first they get permission from the Architecture Lead, and then from the Legal Lead before adding in this dependency.
2. Do we want to segregate code that has pending legal approval in a separate zip file and add it into the main zip file once it's cleared Legal?

Architecture or development

Testing

1. Do we want to change the COSMOS dev process so that a person is forced to update a test case, or add a new test case, when a new feature is added? (Excluding doc features.)
   1. If yes, how can we automate a check for this? Build? Extend CVS check-in wizard?
   2. If not, what alternative to ensure test coverage of all COSMOS code?