bestbarcoder.com

Impact analysis. Considerations of schedule, labor, and costs to implement the proposed change. in .NET Writer DataMatrix in .NET Impact analysis. Considerations of schedule, labor, and costs to implement the proposed change.

Impact analysis. Considerations of schedule, labor, and costs to implement the proposed change. use .net datamatrix 2d barcode encoding tointegrate ecc200 in .net upc barcode Alternatives. A brief discu .net vs 2010 2d Data Matrix barcode ssion of alternatives to the proposed change, with benefits and liabilities provided for each alternative.

. Each part may be continued on another page. Successful Software Development, Second Edition Now that we have a sample s et of forms, let"s take a look at how they might be used in an organization"s change control process. In Figure 4-21, we present scenarios showing the use of the change control process forms and the interaction of the forms with the CCB. Each of these scenarios deals with one of the three following questions (recall Table 4-3) related to unplanned and planned change:.

Figure 4-21 Secnarios showing the use of the change control forms. Do we want something new or different Is something wrong Should we baseline this product To illustrate how an organi .NET datamatrix 2d barcode zation"s change control process may work, we describe each of the three scenarios. We also provide examples of filled-out change control forms in Figures 4-22, Figure 4-23, Figure 4-24 through Figure 4-25.

. Successful Software Develop ment, Second Edition Figure 4-22 Example of a completed change request (CR) form, showing the use of the form in answering the question "Do we want something new or different ". Successful Software Develop Data Matrix barcode for .NET ment, Second Edition Figure 4-23 Example of a completed impact assessment (IA) form for the change request (CR) 98-0019..

Successful Software Develop ment, Second Edition Figure 4-24 Example of a completed incident report (IR) form, showing use of the form in answering the question "Is something wrong ". Successful Software Develop Visual Studio .NET Data Matrix ECC200 ment, Second Edition Figure 4-25 Example of a completed software change notice (SCN) for the incident report (IR) 99-0012..

Change Control Process Scen ario One Do We Want Something New or Different The first scenario is initiated by a desire for something not already in the software or something that extends what is already there. (This change control process is introduced in Figure 4-9.) As illustrated in Figure 4-22, the originator, Tom Green, initiates this unplanned change by describing the change as follows: Provide the capability to add foods (and their associated data) to the database.

A capacity of up to 500 additional foods should be provided. Tom fills out the rest of the upper part of the CR. This CR is presented to the CCB, which assigns it to an analysis group.

The product assurance organization fills out the middle part of the CR for traceability by assigning the IA Control No. of 98-0012 on March 20, 1998..

Successful Software Development, Second Edition As shown in Figure 4-23, th e assigned analyst, Hugh Brown, documents the results of the analysis in an IA, which is then submitted to the CCB. Hugh documents the technical and impact analysis. With the IA in hand, the CCB makes a decision on the disposition of the CR.

As shown in Figure 4-22, the results of this decision are added to the bottom part of the CR. Notice that the CCB considers this change to be out of scope of the existing contract. The contract will thus have to be changed prior to the actual implementation of the change.

Since, in our example, the CCB decision was to approve the proposed change, the planned change control process is initiated (after the contract is modified) as the now-approved change is reflected in successive baseline updates, starting with the system specification. Change Control Process Scenario Two Is Something Wrong The second scenario is initiated by the question of something being at variance with the requirements specification. (This change control process is introduced in Figure 4-10.

) As illustrated in Figure 4-24, the originator, Jane Black, initiates this (potentially) unplanned change by describing the incident as follows: Whenever a quantity in grams is entered in MEAL PLANNER, all the output numbers are outlandishly high. See attached listing for the results of entering "steak, 225 grams." Jane, who can be any project participant, fills out the rest of the upper part of the IR.

This scenario is initiated when any project participant fills out the upper part of an IR. The IR is introduced to the CCB, which assigns it to an analysis organization. As shown in Figure 424, the analyst, John Blue, fills out the middle portion of the IR with his analysis of the IR, and returns it to the CCB.

John documents the incident cause and impact, and recommended resolution. When the CCB makes its decision, the decision portion of the IR is filled out. The example change in this scenario was approved by the CCB.

The developers prepare the approved change, and when the change is ready for implementation, an SCN is issued. Figure 4-25 is an example of a filled-out SCN that might result from the IR shown in Figure 4-24. With the change made, the original wrong has been righted in a visible, traceable, and hence manageable manner.

There is a variation to this scenario that arises occasionally at certain user installations. A number of such installations must operate around the clock. Many of these installations are operated by the U.

S. government, but increasingly more of them operate in the private sector (for example, some mailorder systems and some point-of-sale systems). For these installations, a failure in their computerbased systems can have serious consequences.

When something goes wrong with their software, these users have an emergency situation. Is the change control process bypassed for such emergencies Not at all. A procedure that is responsive to the emergency situation and yet maintains control should be developed in the product assurance plan for systems at such installations.

One procedure to handle such situations that we have observed in successful operation is as follows: When a site liaison representative of the seller (responsible for continued system maintenance) is notified by site personnel of an emergency situation, the representative contacts the appropriate software analyst. The analyst evaluates the problem to ensure that.
Copyright © bestbarcoder.com . All rights reserved.