Deliverable 4 - Design report

jUCMNav – Eclipse Plugin

by

Olivier Clift-Noël
Jean-Philippe Daigle
Jason Kealey
Jordan McManus
Etienne Tremblay
--
Team SoftwareEngineering.Ca


Work presented to
Dr. Liam Peyton
for the
software engineering capstone project




University of Ottawa
May 13th, 2005


Table of Contents




Design Specification

Architecture

Package description

packageHiearchy.png What follows is a description of the packages in our project, for future development reference. We will take care to explain the subset of most important packages with appropriate detail.

Model packages

grl.*
ucm.*
urn.*

Classes that are located in the above packages belong to the URN meta-model provided to us by Daniel. These include URN (User Requirements Notation), UCM (Use Case Maps) and GRL (Goal-Oriented Requirement Language). These packages were generated with EMF. EMF-generated classes and packages behave in a way that reflects the class diagram from which they were generated. For example, if two classes have a bi-directional relation, when you set the property of this relation in one class, the property is automatically set in the other class of the relation. EMF generates the code expressing these relationships for us.

seg.jUCMNav

Contains the root class that is registered as an Eclipse plug-in. Is also the container for all of our other packages. The plugin’s responsibility is simply to manage shared resources. For example, our icons are stored in this package’s icons subfolder. All classes that need to obtain icons, such as the palette, will query this central location.

seg.jUCMNav.actions

All classes located in this package extend the org.eclipse.jface.action.Action class. Actions can manipulate the model or simply perform any general task. All actions located in this package are registered in the ActionRegistry associated with our editor. After being registered in the action registry, actions are not only available for our editor but also for other workbench parts, such as views or toolbars. Classes in this package are mainly used in our editor’s context menu provider and its action bar contributor. For example, the show/hide label action available in a path node or component’s context menu is defined here.

seg.jUCMNav.editors

This package contains the central part of our plug-in: the use case map graphical editor.

  • See in GEF Developer Guide: org.eclipse.gef.ui.parts.GraphicalEditorWithFlyoutPalette

seg.jUCMNav.editors.palette

The palette is a visual representation of all the tools that are available to the user while using an editor. Our palette contains the selection tool, various creation tools for all of our path nodes and the path tool (see seg.jUCMNav.editors.palette.tools).

  • See in GEF Developer Guide: org.eclipse.gef.palette.PaletteRoot

seg.jUCMNav.editors.palette.tools

All classes in this package extend org.eclipse.gef.tools.AbstractTools. The palette contains custom tools that can use finite state machines to change their behaviour depending on the current context. Our plug-in contains a special path tool that allows the creation, extension, merging or connection of different paths.

  • See in GEF Developer Guide: org.eclipse.gef.tools.CreationTool
  • See in GEF Developer Guide: org.eclipse.gef.tools.SelectionTool

seg.jUCMNav.editors.resourceManagement

Our editor has been created to modify .jucm files. The classes in this package are responsible for the conversion of file inputs into our topmost meta-model element, URNspec, and vice-versa. Furthermore, editors watch for changes in the underlying file system object using a class in this package, ResourceTracker.

seg.jUCMNav.editparts

All classes located in this package extend the org.eclipse.gef.editparts. AbstractGraphicalEditPart class via ModelElementEditPart. Edit parts are the controller in the MVC architecture. They are the link between the model and its view. Edit parts contain a figure which is the actual visual representation of the model. When the underlying model changes, edit parts change this visual representation. Furthermore, when the user performs an action in the editor, these actions are sent to the edit part which then delegates any request handling to the edit policies.

The main container edit part is our MapAndPathGraphEditPart which corresponds to the ucm.map.Map and ucm.map.PathGraph model elements. It does not have any visual representation but will contain all component references and path nodes. Our path nodes are represented by our PathNodeEditPart. Furthermore, the controller for the relations between path nodes is handled by the NodeConnectionEditPart. To instantiate our edit parts, we invoke createEditPart() on the GraphicalEditPartFactory.

  • See in GEF Developer Guide: org.eclipse.gef.editparts.AbstractGraphicalEditPart
  • See in GEF Developer Guide: org.eclipse.gef.editparts.AbstractConnectionEditPart
  • See in GEF Developer Guide: org.eclipse.gef.editparts.ScalableFreeformRootEditPart
  • See in GEF Developer Guide: org.eclipse.gef.EditPartFactory

seg.jUCMNav.editpolicies

All classes in this package extend org.eclipse.gef.editpolicies.AbstractEditPolicy. Edit policies represent an edit part’s behaviour. Given certain requests, they are responsible for visual feedback, creating commands to be performed on the model and communication with other edit parts.

  • See in GEF Developer Guide: org.eclipse.gef.editpolicies.AbstractEditPolicy

seg.jUCMNav.editpolicies.element

This package contains the edit policies that handle all non-standard requests that we will have defined on our model elements, such as our path nodes or components. For example, our PathNodeComponentEditPolicy is responsible for the deletion of path nodes.

  • See in GEF Developer Guide: org.eclipse.gef.editpolicies.ComponentEditPolicy (Don't confuse the Component Role for edit policies and UCM/URN Components)

seg.jUCMNav.editpolicies.layout

The edit policies contained in this package take care of the creation, movement and resizing of our model elements. An interesting starting point when studying the edit policies in our plug-in is the MapAndPathGraphXYLayoutEditPolicy which handles the creation of new path nodes and component references and the movement or resizing of all elements in a diagram. Furthermore, the NodeConnectionXYLayoutEditPolicy is responsible for the same kind of behaviour but on node connections.

  • See in GEF Developer Guide: org.eclipse.gef.editpolicies.XYLayoutEditPolicy

seg.jUCMNav.editpolicies.feedback

The edit policies in this package take care of the visual feedback shown to the user before an actual action is performed. For example, since our path nodes are not resizable, this package contains PathNodeNonResizableEditPolicity so that the user knows that this is not appropriate.

  • See in GEF Developer Guide: org.eclipse.gef.editpolicies.NonResizableEditPolicy

seg.jUCMNav.editpolicies.directEdit

Edit policies providing direct edition allow the user to modify text in a diagram directly in the editor. For example, labels can be modified directly using LabelDirectEditPolicy.

  • See in GEF Developer Guide: org.eclipse.gef.editpolicies.DirectEditPolicy

seg.jUCMNav.figures

Figures are the visual representation of model elements. They depend on Draw2D to facilitate their rendering but the package will be extended in the future (or a subpackage will be created) to allow drawing the figures to general outputs such as EPS or SVG files.

  • See in Draw2D Developer Guide: org.eclipse.draw2d.Label
  • See in Draw2D Developer Guide: org.eclipse.draw2d.Figure
  • See in Draw2D Developer Guide: org.eclipse.draw2d.geometry.Rectangle

seg.jUCMNav.figures.router

Classes in this package simply represent the B-spline used to draw the curved connections between path nodes.

  • See in Draw2D Developer Guide: org.eclipse.draw2d.AbstractRouter

seg.jUCMNav.model

The ModelCreationFactory contained in this package contains our business logic when we instantiate new elements from the meta-model. To simplify our application, some elements such as the ucm.map.Map must always contain a ucm.map.PathGraph, the container for path nodes and connections. These are created here. Furthermore, because EMF generates one factory per package, this class helps us centralize the creation of model elements.

  • See in GEF Developer Guide: org.eclipse.gef.requests.CreationFactory

seg.jUCMNav.model.util

This package contains utility classes to manipulate or query the underlying model. For example, to be able to sort a list of certain model elements, such as components, using the algorithms provided to us by java.util, we created ComponentRefAreaComparator which implements Comparator.

seg.jUCMNav.model.commands

All classes in this folder extend our JUCMNavCommand which extends org.eclipse.gef.commands.Command. Commands are used to manipulate the underlying model and are stacked in our editor’s CommandStack. Edit policies and actions instantiate our commands and push them onto the stack. Our JUCMNavCommand imposes a structure used in our test cases.

  • See in GEF Developer Guide: org.eclipse.gef.commands.Command
  • See in GEF Developer Guide: org.eclipse.gef.commands.CompoundCommand

seg.jUCMNav.model.commands.changeConstraints

The commands located in this package are change constraint commands. These are created when an element is moved or resized.

seg.jUCMNav.model.commands.create

The commands in this package either create new elements and add them to the underlying model or simply add passed elements.

seg.jUCMNav.model.commands.delete

The commands in this package remove elements from the model. They must keep references to the deleted items in case an undo() is performed.

seg.jUCMNav.model.commands.transformations

This package contains all other general model manipulation commands such as the Cut Path command.

seg.jUCMNav.tests

This package is the top level container for all JUnit tests. It contains TestAllTestSuite which runs all the programmed tests.

seg.jUCMNav.tests.progress

This package contains the tests defined in our test plan to be able to measure our progress throughout development. ProgressTests will eventually contain 71 tests that should all pass when the project is complete.

seg.jUCMNav.tests.commands

This package contains the tests that run solely on JUCMNav commands. JUCMNavCommandTests test the undo/redo behaviour for all our commands.

seg.jUCMNav.views

This package contains our plug-in’s views or classes that are used by them: the responsibility view, the description view and the property view. As for the toolbox, it has been implemented as a flyout palette inside the editor itself. Furthermore, we have decided not to modify the navigator view. The property view itself uses EObjectPropertySource to refine its behaviour for our custom meta-model elements.

seg.jUCMNav.views.wizards

This package contains our wizards that extend org.eclipse.jface.wizard.Wizard or org.eclipse.jface.wizard.WizardPage. Wizards help perform more complex tasks such as resource creation or import/export.

Package dependencies

jdepend.png

The above image represents our high level package dependencies as computed by JDepend (The diagram layout was done by Graphviz. Although the diagram might seem cluttered at first, it is interesting to note that the color of all nodes indicates the level of dependency. The redder the package, the more it is used elsewhere. As we can see, our commands are the focal point of the system; that is why we have focused most of our testing energy at this level.

Structural Analysis

The following pictures were obtained with Structural Analysis for Java from IBM. This software is used to produce a graph of all the packages with their dependencies. It can draw class and interfaces too but it would clutter our diagrams with no clear benefits. The pictures represent our package dependencies and containment relations. We took some screenshots to show the most meaningful diagrams and then explain some of our class hierarchy choices.

editpartsPackage.png
Here we can see the package diagram for the editpart package. What is interesting to mention here is that our editpart package, which represents our controller in our MVC pattern, uses both the figures and some model packages but doesn't know about the editor that contains it. We want our editpart to be as reusable as possible and didn't include a relation with our editor even though in some situations it would have been easier to do so. We can see that the editpolicies use the editpart package since the editpolicies are the dynamic behaviour of a particular editpart. The advantage of separating the behaviour of the editparts in another class is to add the ability for the editpart to change its behaviour at runtime. For example, if we have an editpolicy that manages the feedback produced to the user when he tries to do a given operation, the editpart could change this default behaviour at runtime to install a totally new editpolicy with new behaviour, etc.
figurePackage.png
Here we have our figure package diagram. This package represents our view in the MVC pattern. The interesting fact here is that the figure package references the model package (the package "map") but in fact it's only the router package inside the figure package that uses the model. We are currently talking about moving the router package outside of the figure package, but right now for semantic reasons the package will probably stay this way. Since the router routes figures, we thought it would be a good idea to put it in the same package as figures, but not including the router package, the figure package doesn't know about the model at all. Only editparts packages use this package.
modelPackage2.png
modelPackage.png
Here we can see our model package. The model package doesn't really represent a model in an MVC pattern; rather it's the package containing our classes using most of the metamodel given by our client. The first diagram represents a two-level hierarchy of the package around model. What is interesting here is that it shows the package hierarchy of the command package too. The command package modifies the model with operations that can be undone. We have different kinds of commands, separated into different packages, as explained previously.

The second diagram is a little bit more interesting and shows the dependencies of the model package. Once again we can see that the model package uses a lot of packages from the metamodel. That's normal since our model package contains a class that is responsible for creating all the classes we use from the metamodel. We centralized this process in the class ModelCreationFactory which knows how to construct an object from a given class. This way if the model changes a little bit and we have to change the way we initialize an object, the changes will be constrained to this factory.

Next, we can see that the entire commands package uses the model package since most of them create objects. The resourceManagement package uses it too because it's the class responsible for loading files. When you load a file, you have to create objects, which is why there's this dependency.
jUCMNavPackage.png
Here we have the main jUCMNav package. This package is the central point of our plugin. The only class in this package is JUCMNavPlugin, which represents our plugin in eclipse. This diagram only shows the containment relationship of the package, but it also shows that the palette and the resourcemanagement packages use this package. In fact, those two packages use the JUCMNavPlugin class only to know the path of our plugin in eclipse. No function actually calls a function within JUCMNavPlugin. In fact, JUCMNavPlugin does no processing; it's just a class containing an id of our plugin. All the information about our plugin is contained in our plugin.xml.

Summary of structural analysis
Here is the summary from Structural Analysis for Java when we run it with all packages from our project and the generated class from the metamodel of our client:
  • "The overall stability of the system is 67%. Highly stable systems are typically above 90%. There are 288 objects, forming a total of 2297 relationships. The typical object in this system immediately depends on 7.98 objects. On average, the modification of one object potentially affects 93.2 other objects."

And then here are the results if we look only at the classes of our project without the generated metamodel:
  • "The overall stability of the system is 87%. Highly stable systems are typically above 90%. There are 100 objects, forming a total of 403 relationships. The typical object in this system immediately depends on 4.03 objects. On average, the modification of one object potentially affects 12.1 other objects."

We have to take those numbers with caution. We must take into account that the objects generated by EMF are tightly coupled with EMF and that we don't really have (or need) any control on the generation of the code itself. So for this same reason, we think that the "93.2 objects that can potentially be affected by a change" figure is greatly influenced by our generated code. We can try to improve this number by doing some refactoring and eliminating some dependencies between elements. We refactored a LOT our package hierarchy to produce the hierarchy we have now. Unfortunately, we didn't run Structural Analysis for Java (SA4J) on it before to compare the results. Instead we provide numbers generated by SA4J with the generated EMF code and without it to have a good comparison. The code that we have actually written is analyzed in the second column of this table.

Statistics
Property Value with generated code Value without generated code
Number of Objects 288 100
Number of Packages 48 27
Number of Relationships 2297 403
Maximum Dependencies 76 26
Minimum Dependencies 0 0
Average Dependencies 7.98 4.03
Maximum Dependents 98 16
Minimum Dependents 0 0
Average Dependents 7.98 4.03
Relationship To Object Ratio 7.98 4.03
Affects on Average 93.2 12.1

Structural Patterns
Here is a table of the main anti-patterns that can be found in our system. The numbers look bad for the generated code part, but as we said, we are confident that EMF can account for a lot of those numbers. As you can see, if we delete the generated code from the analysis, we obtain much more acceptable numbers. The descriptions of each pattern were taken from the IBM SA4J FAQ.

  Value with generated code Value without generated code
Pattern Count % of total objects Count % of total objects
Tangle
tangle.png
Tangles are a bunch of intermingled circular dependencies. If any object in a tangle is changed, all of the other objects in that tangle are affected. The bigger the tangle is, the more significant its negative impact will be on the rest of the system. Tangles are first candidates for refactoring. By looking at the weakest links within them, you can break them down into smaller, acyclic parts.
9 n/a 5 n/a
Global Hub
globalhub.png
Global hubs are hybrids of global breakables and global butterflies. As breakables they are often affected when anything is changed, and as butterflies they affect a significant percentage of the system. Global hubs can be very harmful for your system. They indicate that a system is not conceptualized well and that it is highly unstable.
87 30% 7 7%
Global Breakable
globalbreakable.png
Global breakables are the objects with large number of global dependencies. Global breakables often break when anything in the system is changed. Typically, these would be implementations of the highest-level concepts in your system. Having many global breakables in your system is rather undesirable, because it implies high instability.
136 47% 17 17%
Global Butterfly
globalButterfly.png
Global butterflies are the objects with a large number of global dependents. Generally they are basic interfaces, abstract base classes, and utilities. Global butterflies are very important, even though they are not necessarily problematic. If you change a global butterfly, the overall global impact will be significant.
151 52% 34 34%
Local Hub
localHub.png
Local hubs are the objects with many immediate dependencies and dependents. In a sense, hubs are both butterflies and breakables. Local hubs are typically undesirable because they act as amplifiers of the change throughout the system. Refactoring a local hub into several classes will distribute the dependencies and improve the stability of the system overall.
15 5% 2 2%
Local Breakable
localBreakable.png
Local breakables are the objects with many immediate dependencies. Local breakables are typically undesirable because they "know too much." Refactoring a local breakable into several classes will distribute the dependencies and improve the stability of the system overall.
57 19% 7 7%
Local Butterfly
localButterfly.png
Local butterflies are the objects with many immediate dependents. Typically they would be basic interfaces, abstract base classes, and utilities. Local butterflies are very important, even though they are not necessarily problematic. If you change a local butterfly, the immediate local impact will be significant.
50 17% 5 5%

We want to reduce even more the number here since one of our main goals is to have a maintainable system. The more stable our code is, the better. We'll make some effort in the future to reduce those numbers to a minimum and show that our system is robust and that changes carry the appropriate scope.

Design

The design of the main packages you are going to code needs to be described using diagrams (preferably UML). For business components, this would typically be a set of class diagrams. For your user interface you might have a diagram showing the different forms or pages and the dependencies between them. For your database you should have a detailed database model, or at least a well-documented database schema. You do not need to document and diagram every single class in your system. Show what is important for understanding the design of the system. Only show important relationships, methods and attributes. Leave the details to your source code..

You also need to diagram how your design will satisfy system requirements. This is typically done using interaction diagrams of the participating classes for the most significant scenarios and mechanisms that relate to your use cases and non-functional requirements. The intent here is NOT to diagram every last step or method call in your system. The intent is to show your architecture supports the requirement by showing how the different components and layers of your system distribute and coordinate the desired behavior. Only critical classes or method calls should be mentioned.

Algorithm(s) or key mechanisms (like error handling, or persistence) that are critical to your system should be described as well within the context of the overall architecture and design of the system.

Javadoc

We put a lot of effort into documenting our system with javadoc syntax directly in our code. This makes the generation of useful developer documentation easier and can be accessed on the web: Javadoc. Some comments are better left to the code itself so we'll talk only about the important architectures present in our system.

Use Case Maps metamodel

Main package diagram
main_model_package.png

Here is a package diagram representing the relations between our model packages. The package we'll be using the most in our application is UCM since our editor targets this kind of file. Since the work done on jUCMNav is only the tip of the iceberg of a larger tool, and since jUCMNav will one day be an editor for the whole URN notation, we need all the classes located in the URN metamodel.

UCM package diagram
UCM_package.png

If we go one level deeper in the hierarchy, we obtain the UCM package. A UCM is represented by Maps and can contain scenarios and performance information. We will concentrate on the Map package since the scope of our project is focused on this package. The Map package will be used a lot in our application since all the information that an UCM contains is in this package.

UCM.Map class diagram
UCM_Map_package.png

A subset of the Map package is presented in the diagram shown above. This class diagram shows the essence of our model and what we'll represent on screen for the user. Nearly all of the classes here will have a visual representation and will let the user interact with it. As we know, the model only represents the data that the user will interact with. This class diagram is extremely important to understand because its hierarchy drives all of the architectural decisions we make in our project.

This model is at its fifth version since the beginning of the project and will probably change again during the course of the project. Petal files are included in our TWiki here (URNMetaModel) for a better understanding of the evolution of the model. Some classes in this diagram are more important than others for the general understanding of the diagram. Among the most important, there's UCMSpec which represents the root of a use case map. A UCM file can have more than one diagram per file. A Map represents a diagram within the file. The diagram consists of a PathGraph and a set of component references. Another interesting class is the PathNode class. This represents all the UCM elements that can be inserted on a path. For instance, the start points, end points, responsibilities, etc. NodeConnection is the class used to connect two PathNodes together. See the PathNode hiearchy in the following diagram.

UCM.Map: PathNode hierarchy class diagram
UCM_Map_package2.png

This diagram is pretty self-explanatory. This shows the possible PathNodes in our diagram. OCL constraints could have been written in those diagrams to define more clearly how these classes can be used. For example, there should always be an empty point before and after another path node. EMF doesn't support OCL constraints, so it would have been useless to enforce the constraints there. Instead we opted for another strategy. Right now in our prototypes, we use an ad-hoc solution, appropriate for feasability testing purposes.

jUCMNav Design

MVC Architecture

MVC.png

The package diagram shows all relations between the packages of our project. We wanted to show that the diagram could be separated in Model-View-Controller layers. Since our architecture is built around this pattern, we thought it a good idea to organize the package diagram this way.

Use Case Map

Here we included some typical scenarios in our application that we thought could be interesting for the reader. These are pretty simple UCM diagrams, but since we wanted to use this opportunity to test our application, we were limited by the number of features our software supported. Just to make sure the reader understands a UCM diagram, we'll list here the elements that compose a UCM diagram.

  • UCM diagrams are composed of components. Components are elements of our system we want to represent in our diagram. This could represent a class, a user, a package etc. This is usually represented by a rectangle:
    • comp.png
  • The UCM starts with an interaction path. This path starts with a StartPoint:
    • startPoint.png
  • Then the path can be extended with some empty points. EmptyPoints are there only to give shape to the path. They can be used to show a condition on a fork too.
    • emptyPoint.png
  • Extremely important are the responsibilities along the path. These represent things that a component is responsible for. These are either written by our development team or a framework responsibility. This is represented with a little x along the path.
    • resp.png
  • Sometimes we want to represent that our system offers a choice. We represent this with an or-Fork. Right now our system only supports or-Forks, but other kinds of forks will be supported in the future. As you can see, the first two emptypoints of the paths after a fork must have condition labels to show why we should follow this path instead of the other.
    • orFork.png
  • Then the path finishes with an EndPoint to signal that this is the end of an interaction path:
    • endPoint.png

Typical scenario: moving something in GEF.
MoveNodeUCM.png

This scenario represents the user selecting a node and moving it in the diagram. We follow this action along a path that passes through the model-view-controller components. These are virtual components, but we wanted to show the interaction of them all.

Something that could be interesting about this diagram is which responsibilities are handled by us and which are relegated to the framework.
  • In the selection tool component, the GenerateMoveRequest responsibility is done by the framework right now. Eventually we want to do our own SelectionTool that will be able to generate requests depending on what we selected. This way we can have one tool that can do all the tasks we need to edit our paths.
  • In the Editpart component, DispatchRequest is done by the framework. What is done here is that the editpart tries to find an editpolicy that can process the request.
  • In the EditPolicy component, we programmed the GenerateCommand responsibility. Here we construct the command that will execute when we receive a request of a certain type. In our system, we have several kinds of editpolicies that know how to generate a command for each kind of request from the user.
  • FillCommandParameters only fill the generated command with the parameter of the request and dispatch the command to the edit domain where it will be executed. We omitted this detail in the diagram since it would have been too big.
  • In the Command component, we programmed the execute responsibility. Then the model is updated in the MetaModel component. The MetaModel was generated with the EMF tool, so we didn't implement those responsibilities in the MetaModel.
  • In our editpart, we have to tell our view how to update itself. This is implemented by the programmers.
  • Finally, the figures lay themselves out and then are drawn on the screen to the correct positions to reflect the change to the user. This is done by the framework.

Typical scenario: Load a file and extract the model.
loadFileUCM.png

This scenario represents the loading of a UCM file. It explains the process that eclipse uses to find an editor for the file type the user tries to open. In this case it's a UCM file. First of all, after the user selects the file, eclipse looks in the JUCMNavPlugin component to see if there's a compatible editor in this plugin for this file type. If so, we proceed to launch the editor and then set the input of the editor to the data from the file. The component UrnModelManager loads the file and then calls an EMF class to interpret the XMI (serialized data) of the UCM file. If the file is valid, we can continue to the next phase. Here the editor takes its main editpartviewer and makes it generate all the edit parts for the model. Depending on whether the model elements have an editpart or not, the GraphicalEditPartFactory will generate appropriate editparts for the model elements. If it's a connection then the BSplineConnectionRouter will route the connection to make it follow a spline. After all the model elements have been processed, then the loading is finished and the user can edit the diagram.

Alpha System

Screen shots to illustrate the current progress of your system should be included in your status report for the iteration.

demo_page1.png

  • Screenshot 1: Notice components, colors, multiple files in one UCM

demo_page2.png
  • Screenshot 2: Notice components are bound, or-forks, and-forks, path node labels, component labels

Project Plan

Now that the architecture and design has been completely specified, you should have a complete project plan that captures all the tasks left to do on your project (and who will do them). Ideally, it would be broken down so that no individual task is more than 1 week in duration.

Project plan
shedule.png

Quality Assurance Report

Include a test report (of around 1 to 2 pages) that reflects the current state of your “alpha” system. The report should provide a brief description of the release that was tested. Clearly indicate what release was tested (date and/or build number) and indicate what requirements were supposed to be addressed in the release in terms of use cases and non-functional requirements. Then summarize the tests that were run to verify your system. For each test, you can indicate whether or not it has been implemented yet (i.e. can you run the test), and whether or not the system has passed the test. You should also summarize the status of bugs. How many, what severity, and what is the rate of change in finding and fixing bugs.

See JUnitTestPlan and DevDocCommands for more in-depth information on the tests.

Notes:
  • See BugZilla
  • We use enhancements to track work items; they are not bugs, they are reminders of work to do.
  • Some of our low priority items are not to be fixed during the scope of our project, they are reminders for future developers.

Date: May 9th, 2005.

Progress Tests

Test Group Number Test Group Name / Description # of tests written # of tests that can run # of tests that pass
1 Palette tests 14 2 2
2 Properties tests 9 5 5
3 Behaviour tests 18 5 5
4 Contextual Menu tests 13 0 0
5 Stub action tests 6 0 0
6 General non-editor tests 11 0 0
  Total 71 12 12

Command tests

  • As of May 9th, 2005, we have created tests for 15/21 of our commands.
  • All of our command tests pass. We do not know how many of these tests we will have when we are done.

Bug reports

Level Bugs Found Bugs Fixed Bugs Remaining
Emergency 3 3 0
High 11 8 3
Low 15 9 6
Enhancements 30 6 24


Date: May 19th, 2005.

Test Group Number Test Group Name / Description # of tests written # of tests that can run # of tests that pass
1 Palette tests 14 2 2
2 Properties tests 9 5 5
3 Behaviour tests 18 5 5
4 Contextual Menu tests 13 0 0
5 Stub action tests 6 0 0
6 General non-editor tests 11 0 0
  Total 71 12 12

Command tests

  • As of May 19th, 2005, we have created tests for 14/18 of our commands.
  • All of our command tests pass. We do not know how many of these tests we will have when we are done.

Bug reports

Level Bugs Found Bugs Fixed Bugs Remaining
Emergency 4 4 0
High 25 22 3
Low 30 14 16
Enhancements 30 7 23

Requirements

In scope requirements (from MustDoReport)
Status Count
Approved 9
Started 13
Implemented 14
Completed 7
Total 43

Out of scope requirements:
Status Count
Approved 58
Started 1
Implemented 8
Completed 0
Total 67


Date: May 25th, 2005.

(removed one test)

Test Group Number Test Group Name / Description # of tests written # of tests that can run # of tests that pass
1 Palette tests 14 14 9
2 Properties tests 9 9 7
3 Behaviour tests 18 6 6
4 Contextual Menu tests 13 0 0
5 Stub action tests 6 0 0
6 General non-editor tests 10 2 2
  Total 70 31 24

Command tests

  • As of May 25th, 2005, we have created tests for 21/22 of our commands.
  • All of our command tests pass. We do not know how many of these tests we will have when we are done.

Bug reports

Level Bugs Found Bugs Fixed Bugs Remaining
Emergency 4 4 0
High 31 25 6
Low 32 21 11
Enhancements 39 8 31

Requirements

In scope requirements (from MustDoReport)
Status Count
Approved 7
Started 14
Implemented 15
Completed 7
Total 43

Out of scope requirements:
Status Count
Approved 58
Started 1
Implemented 8
Completed 0
Total 67


Date: May 31st, 2005.

Test Group Number Test Group Name / Description # of tests written # of tests that can run # of tests that pass
1 Palette tests 14 14 12
2 Properties tests 9 8 7
3 Behaviour tests 18 7 7
4 Contextual Menu tests 13 0 0
5 Stub action tests 6 0 0
6 General non-editor tests 10 2 2
  Total 70 31 28

Command tests

  • As of May 31st, 2005, we have created tests for 29/35 of our commands.
  • 28 or our 29 tests pass. We do not know how many of these tests we will have when we are done.

Bug reports

Level Bugs Found Bugs Fixed Bugs Remaining
Emergency 4 4 0
High 32 29 3
Low 37 21 7
Enhancements 43 24 19

Requirements

In scope requirements (from MustDoReport)
Status Count
Approved 3
Started 8
Implemented 22
Completed 9
Total 42

Out of scope requirements:
Status Count
Approved 58
Started 1
Implemented 8
Completed 0
Total 67


Date: June 1st, 2005.

Test Group Number Test Group Name / Description # of tests written # of tests that can run # of tests that pass
1 Palette tests 14 14 12
2 Properties tests 13 13 8
3 Behaviour tests 15 14 14
4 Contextual Menu tests 12 11 8
5 Stub action tests 6 0 0
6 General non-editor tests 10 5 5
  Total 70 57 47

Command tests

  • As of June 1st, 2005, we have created tests for 29/35 of our commands.
  • 28 or our 29 tests pass. We do not know how many of these tests we will have when we are done.

Bug reports

Level Bugs Found Bugs Fixed Bugs Remaining
Emergency 4 4 0
High 32 29 3
Low 37 21 7
Enhancements 43 24 19

Requirements

In scope requirements (from MustDoReport)
Status Count
Approved 3
Started 8
Implemented 8
Completed 23
Total 42

Out of scope requirements:
Status Count
Approved 58
Started 1
Implemented 8
Completed 0
Total 67


Date: June 14th, 2005.

Test Group Number Test Group Name / Description # of tests written # of tests that can run # of tests that pass
1 Palette tests 14 14 12
2 Properties tests 13 13 13
3 Behaviour tests 15 14 14
4 Contextual Menu tests 12 11 9
5 Stub action tests 6 0 0
6 General non-editor tests 10 5 5
  Total 70 57 53

Command tests

  • As of June 1st, 2005, we have created tests for 32/46 of our commands.
  • 32 of our 32 tests pass. We do not know how many of these tests we will have when we are done.

Bug reports

Level Bugs Found Bugs Fixed Bugs Remaining
Emergency 5 5 0
High 45 43 2
Low 48 39 9
Enhancements 47 29 18

Requirements

In scope requirements (from MustDoReport)
Status Count
Approved 3
Started 5
Implemented 8
Completed 26
Total 42

Out of scope requirements:
Status Count
Approved 50
Started 3
Implemented 13
Completed 0
Total 66

Evolution not tracked here. Could be inferred, but lack of time.


Date: July 14th, 2005.

Test Group Number Test Group Name / Description # of tests written # of tests that can run # of tests that pass
1 Palette tests 14 14 14
2 Properties tests 13 13 13
3 Behaviour tests 15 15 15
4 Contextual Menu tests 12 12 12
5 Stub action tests 6 1 1
6 General non-editor tests 10 8 8
  Total 70 63 63

Command tests

  • As of July 14th, 2005, 36 command tests have been created. There should be 42 tests at this point.
  • Some commands are used by others internally (package visibility) and don't need to be tested.
  • Some other commands are marked in BugZilla as must refactor/clean and will be tested once refactored/cleaned.
  • All of our programmed command tests pass.

Bug reports

Level Bugs Found Bugs Fixed Bugs Remaining
Emergency 5 5 0
High 47 46 1
Low 55 46 9
Enhancements 68 40 27

  • Of the remaining bugs, only five are in scope. Rest are for future work. They should be completed by the milestone date.

Requirements

In scope requirements (from MustDoReport)
Status Count
Approved 0
Started 1
Implemented 0
Completed 42
Total 43

  • The only remaining requirement is ReqElemStubActions's more esoteric behaviour. Requirement was too general anyways smile

Out of scope requirements:
Status Count
Approved 49
Started 1
Implemented 0
Completed 15
Total 65

Topic revision: r31 - 24 Aug 2005, JasonKealey
This site is powered by FoswikiCopyright © by the contributing authors. All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
Ideas, requests, problems regarding Foswiki? Send feedback