Overall, I believe the second sprint went well. Like the previous sprint, we had meetings in person or over discord. All in all, I believe we all did a fantastic job of keeping each other updated and asking each other questions when we got stuck. I noticed that once we finished one issue, nobody hesitated to start another issue which really helped us with moving the project along. During this sprint, we worked on several of the issues as a group. We kept up the open-mindedness, accountability, honesty, and respect that were originally described as the culture we hoped to establish in the working agreement. Like in the previous sprints, we determined the maximum amount of work that each person should attempt to finish in order to split the work fairly and equally in regards to the issues we had, and we mostly adhered to it.
I worked on multiple issues that involved verifying that the pantry projects had the correct extensions, linters, and pipeline stages. Like the last sprint, I looked over the project’s file types, created a list of required linters based on the files, added any new linters, verified that the new linters passed, verified which stages were required, and adjusted the stages as necessary. For this type of issue, I worked on “Verifying that all Thea’s Pantry projects have the correct extensions, linters, and pipeline stages – InventorySystem General” by myself and then worked on “Verifying that InventoryAPI has the correct extensions, linters, and pipeline stages” and “Verifying that all Thea’s Pantry projects have the correct extensions, linters, and pipeline stages – Inventory Backend” with the group. When working on the issue for InventorySystem General, I realized that the build and test scripts weren’t needed so I also removed those files. I also worked on “Determine what needs to be done on GuestInfoFrontend” with the group. For this issue, we reviewed comments left in the code, wireframe, and documentation. Then if any work worthy of note needed to be done, we created new issues for them. We created these issues (“Moving “Other Assistance” attribute” and “Moving Receiving Unemployment Attribute to Assistance”) and linked them to the initial issue.
I think we did really well as a team for this sprint. We did not get around to establishing a method that will guarantee that particular individuals are not examining the majority of issues, as we had originally intended when drafting our working agreement. For this sprint, we did not discuss how we would make sure to stay on top of issues that needed to be reviewed because many of the issues included us working together and we stayed on top of a lot of the issues. The time frame between finishing an issue, reviewing, and merging was a lot shorter than the last sprint. We made sure to constantly communicate with each other and the first one that could review an issue took the task. As a group, I can see that we improved a lot in that regard but I still think we could establish a method to make sure that reviewing code is not done mainly by a few individuals in the group. As an Individual, I showed a lot of improvement by checking on what needs to be done compared to the previous sprints but I think I can still improve when it comes to merging my issues as quickly as possible after they’ve been reviewed.
From the blog CS@Worcester – Live Laugh Code by Shamarah Ramirez and used with permission of the author. All other rights reserved by the author.