Category Archives: CS-448

Sprint 2 Retrospective

Now that sprint 2 is completed it is time for another retrospective. My team implemented some of the changes mentioned in our sprint 1 retrospective and I believe they were good for us. After completing sprint 2 we found some things we could improve in order for sprint 3 to be more successful.

Something that worked well for us was changing up who worked on what. We took the problem we identified in our first sprint and came up with a solution. In sprint 1 each team member only worked on a single project within our front end for all the issues. Doing this did not allow our team to become diverse and adaptable when we only stuck to one thing. For this sprint, we made sure to change our roles which was a positive for the team. Everyone got to work on something new instead of sticking with the same project they worked on in sprint 1.

Something that our team could improve on is how we break down issues. I actually think we did not do quite as well with breaking down issues as we did on our first sprint. Our sprint started off strong and the first few issues were broken down and weighed well but later we had a problem. For our testing issues, we did not break it down nearly enough. We thought creating the test would be simple enough but creating the test turned out to be more difficult. We split the issue by which test it was for instead of the steps needed to complete the testing. This was a mistake because as individuals it was a lot to try to take on at once. We ran into a lot of issues and then trying to share what we did to get past each issue and play catch up with each other still made things difficult. For our next sprint, we need to either work as a team to tackle a large problem or break down these larger problems into smaller chunks.

Since we switched up jobs for this sprint I mostly worked on the backend of the inventory system. The issues I worked on are the following:

My first issue was updating the JavaScript in the backend to modern JavaScript

https://gitlab.com/LibreFoodPantry/client-solutions/theas-pantry/inventorysystem/backend/-/issues/46

My next issue was creating the test for getInventory

https://gitlab.com/LibreFoodPantry/client-solutions/theas-pantry/inventorysystem/backend/-/issues/54

As an individual, I believe I could improve by getting a better understanding of how the project works as a whole. While working on my tasks, I only looked into the pieces of the project that needed to be worked on. I think going through the project more thoroughly and understanding what does what could have made fixing some of the issues easier. 

Overall I think sprint 2 was a good experience for the team. We took our changes from sprint 1 and implemented them for sprint 2 which was a good change for the team. We found some more weaknesses that can easily be adjusted for sprint 3. With multiple chances to update our strategy, I expect that sprint 3 will be even more successful than our previous two sprints.

From the blog CS@Worcester – Ryan Klenk's Blog by Ryan Klenk and used with permission of the author. All other rights reserved by the author.

Sprint 2 – Retrospective

For this sprint, overall, the team work significantly better. Not only did we continue to communicate well with one another, but there was a lot of improvement because we were much more experienced with the project. Not only were we more familiar with the coding side of things, but since we had a much firmer understanding of SCRUM as a whole, it allowed us to skip through a lot of the learning process that happened in the first sprint and get right to work instead.

For one, we had accurate weights for almost all of our issues. This is a huge contrast with Sprint 1, as Sprint 1 was littered with issues that should have been weights of 2-3, but instead they were 1s. With this more correct weights, we were able to delegate a lot better, and we also were just more aware of the types of problems we were facing. In Sprint 1 for example, I had moments where I picked up a ‘1’ weight issue, only to be stuck on it for almost a whole week or more because I had to learning about how things worked. Now in Sprint 2, because I can skip a bit of the learning, since I had already did it during Sprint 1, many of the ‘1’ weight issues were actually ‘1s,’ thankfully!

On top of being more familiar with the code and the SCRUM process, we realized that we as a team, did not focus on the issues as heavily as we should have. Although we worked as a group somewhat in Sprint 1, Sprint 2 was much much more collaborative. We realized that the system is a lot more interlocked than we realized, and because of that, if Sam was working on one portion of the API, Moses might have insights, or vice versa. Many instances of issues being tackled was one of us starting it, and another member jumping in and finishing it together.

Other than the improvements in understand and our teamwork, I tackled setting up the Reporting Integrations repo. I figured that since everyone was working on the API, Backend, or a mix of the two, it would be a bit easier for me to tackle the creation of a whole separate part of the Reporting Systems. I think, this was for the best because although help might have useful at times, overall, I was worried that since the Reporting Integrations was going to be made from the ground up essentially, it would become a situation of too many cooks ruin the pot. I am glad I did this because once I set up Reporting Integrations, I had a very solid understanding of the different tools that we used such as the Pipeline, and with that understanding, I was able to help much of the team with some issues.

Pipeline updates
Reporting Integrations
Multi-Architecture Conversion Backend, Frontend, Swagger CLI

After that, things became much smoother as people collectively got a hold on the issues, and though we are still lacking experience in many areas, it feels like we have a better grasp on everything as a whole. I think that moving forward, we should keep our pacing, and improve our communication even more potentially. I do really enjoy how we are much more collaborative on the different issues, and though sometimes we have to focus on our own task, the team work aspect is very refreshing and helpful. We are almost like each other’s rubber ducks.

Somethings that still aren’t too good is that we still only focus on working together when we are face to face, but I think that is overall fine. It could be better if we paired up, or had meetings outside of class and would make things smoother, but things are passable. Also, this isn’t exactly our whole responsibility either!

From the blog CS@Worcester – Bored Coding by iisbor and used with permission of the author. All other rights reserved by the author.

Sprint 2 Retrospective

Compared to the last sprint not only did I personally complete much more work, but the team accomplished a lot. As a matter of fact, we got over 17 in weight done in the first week compared to the much lower amount in the first sprint. I noticed that when it came to issues of us needing help or the sharing of information a lot more work was done together, and it allowed us to complete more of the epics and issues. For example, one of the issues me and kelvin both had similar solutions one was for the backend and the other was for the API, once Kelvin modified the commands/build.sh on the API I looked and see what changes he had made so that I could make similar changes to the Backend.

            Much of what was accomplished at the beginning was all of the issues that didn’t involve unit testing such as the verification of collection names in the API as well as Evaluating and Improving the API as a whole. The epics that were finished during the sprint were the API refactoring of file/directory/release structure and infrastructure as well as the conversion of all docker images we are building to multi-architecture images. As I state previously, we completed more epics in this sprint than that of the previous one.

            As for improvements that could be made I think the biggest improvement we can make is to keep focus especially towards the end of the sprint, I’ve noticed once we get into the final week of the spring right before the sprint review the progress tends to slow down and focus lessens a fair amount this mainly do to shifting attention to the review, reflection, and the planning of the next sprint. While all of those steps are very important to the process maintaining the flow that we have the first 2 weeks into the last one will allow us to possibly complete even more and get farther into the project. As for personal improvements I can make I think practicing and taking on even more of a workload would be to my benefit as it will allow me to cover more ground and become more accustomed to the system. The biggest issue I had in the previous sprint was that I spent a lot of time resolving issues that had come up while fixing other issues, as well as trying to delve into the Frontend of the system. I maintained the right of amount of weight completion each week which was a significant improvement over last sprints and I plan to keep that going into the next sprint.

            The best thing to come out of this sprint was that most of the last sprint will be finishing up unit testing and focusing on making sure the system works correctly so that next semesters students don’t have issues with the system and can work on it efficiently Much like how we found it. The most important thing now is to keep the system running and keep Epics organized and unopen so that the next semester can work off those.

https://gitlab.com/LibreFoodPantry/client-solutions/theas-pantry/guestinfosystem/guestinfobackend/-/issues/82

Designed Unit test for replaceGuest Endpoint.

https://gitlab.com/LibreFoodPantry/client-solutions/theas-pantry/guestinfosystem/guestinfobackend/-/issues/76

Implementation of the unit Test designed for the replaceGuest Endpoint.

https://gitlab.com/LibreFoodPantry/client-solutions/theas-pantry/guestinfosystem/guestinfoapi/-/issues/102

Verification of collection names in the API to make sure they make sense and are correct.

https://gitlab.com/LibreFoodPantry/client-solutions/theas-pantry/guestinfosystem/guestinfobackend/-/issues/87

modified commands/build.sh in backend to use context to specify what image to build.

https://gitlab.com/LibreFoodPantry/client-solutions/theas-pantry/guestinfosystem/guestinfobackend/-/issues/86

added Pipeline variable with multiplatform string to backend.

From the blog cs@worcester – Marels Blog by mbeqo and used with permission of the author. All other rights reserved by the author.

Sprint-2

Hello, welcome to the Second-Sprint Retrospective Blog. I contributed to the group project by working on the tasks assigned on GitLab. I chose to complete one of the jobs, but it was more difficult than I had expected. I am currently participating in an activity that calls for additional alterations, and adding more details is more complicated than I had anticipated. It is up to the team and me to decide whether to put the modifications for the necessary measures. 

After the team and I adjusted to the issue board required for the work and practice. Completing this ISSUE Weight assignment with a total weight of 3 is reasonable and practicable. 

The Issue:
backend — write a test suite for API (changes); This activity writes test in Chai, ensuring that the backend works with the API while ensuring you get a file back in .xls format (get the simple tests working). 

My challenge concerning these works is researching the topic of “Chai.” It explains that Chai is an assertion library written in JavaScript with different test frameworks. It allows maintenance of your code’s functionality and checks that it follows those assertions. It has the “assertions” style comparable to Node.js’s built-in assert module, and the “expect” style uses a chainable API to create more legible and expressive tests. Chai can be used with any testing framework, including Mocha, to define test suites with a specific feature. Each test in a test suite will state how your code should act.
I learned that it has additional chai-related dependencies after researching the topic. These include additions to npm install chai, chai-HTTP, chai-as-promise, etc. Those additions make the process simpler, but it doesn’t look good. It has already gone through the potentially functional aspects, even after the review, code addition/construction, and code comparison phases. However, the conjunction of some codes didn’t pass due to some missing information and led to some failures. 

To improve myself, I plan to seek information regarding this kind of assignment from members of my group and members of other groups by asking questions. It will serve as a learning experience. Even though the end of the year is getting close, I have seen that my abilities to manage time have increased, and the learning steps for work are becoming the assigned time. We ran into various technical issues during the development process, which resulted in delays; the team and I had a fantastic mid-round in finishing all of the items listed on the sprint backlog. These delays are different learning experiences that require better comprehension and learning new specialties to avoid those misconceptions and repeated attempts resulting from communication breakdowns. The problems may avoid by increasing knowledge and diving into the serious issue with the other group collaborating. 

In conclusion, in the second sprint, our team had good objectives and executed them, though we succeeded wildly better after the First-Sprint. We overcame some obstacles and learned about new topics while working through the complex pipeline and completing one of the assignments.

From the blog Andrew Lam’s little blog by Andrew Lam and used with permission of the author. All other rights reserved by the author.

Sprint-2

Hello, welcome to the Second-Sprint Retrospective Blog. I contributed to the group project by working on the tasks assigned on GitLab. I chose to complete one of the jobs, but it was more difficult than I had expected. I am currently participating in an activity that calls for additional alterations, and adding more details is more complicated than I had anticipated. It is up to the team and me to decide whether to put the modifications for the necessary measures. 

After the team and I adjusted to the issue board required for the work and practice. Completing this ISSUE Weight assignment with a total weight of 3 is reasonable and practicable. 

The Issue:
backend — write a test suite for API (changes); This activity writes test in Chai, ensuring that the backend works with the API while ensuring you get a file back in .xls format (get the simple tests working). 

My challenge concerning these works is researching the topic of “Chai.” It explains that Chai is an assertion library written in JavaScript with different test frameworks. It allows maintenance of your code’s functionality and checks that it follows those assertions. It has the “assertions” style comparable to Node.js’s built-in assert module, and the “expect” style uses a chainable API to create more legible and expressive tests. Chai can be used with any testing framework, including Mocha, to define test suites with a specific feature. Each test in a test suite will state how your code should act.
I learned that it has additional chai-related dependencies after researching the topic. These include additions to npm install chai, chai-HTTP, chai-as-promise, etc. Those additions make the process simpler, but it doesn’t look good. It has already gone through the potentially functional aspects, even after the review, code addition/construction, and code comparison phases. However, the conjunction of some codes didn’t pass due to some missing information and led to some failures. 

To improve myself, I plan to seek information regarding this kind of assignment from members of my group and members of other groups by asking questions. It will serve as a learning experience. Even though the end of the year is getting close, I have seen that my abilities to manage time have increased, and the learning steps for work are becoming the assigned time. We ran into various technical issues during the development process, which resulted in delays; the team and I had a fantastic mid-round in finishing all of the items listed on the sprint backlog. These delays are different learning experiences that require better comprehension and learning new specialties to avoid those misconceptions and repeated attempts resulting from communication breakdowns. The problems may avoid by increasing knowledge and diving into the serious issue with the other group collaborating. 

In conclusion, in the second sprint, our team had good objectives and executed them, though we succeeded wildly better after the First-Sprint. We overcame some obstacles and learned about new topics while working through the complex pipeline and completing one of the assignments.

From the blog Andrew Lam’s little blog by Andrew Lam and used with permission of the author. All other rights reserved by the author.

Sprint-2

Hello, welcome to the Second-Sprint Retrospective Blog. I contributed to the group project by working on the tasks assigned on GitLab. I chose to complete one of the jobs, but it was more difficult than I had expected. I am currently participating in an activity that calls for additional alterations, and adding more details is more complicated than I had anticipated. It is up to the team and me to decide whether to put the modifications for the necessary measures. 

After the team and I adjusted to the issue board required for the work and practice. Completing this ISSUE Weight assignment with a total weight of 3 is reasonable and practicable. 

The Issue:
backend — write a test suite for API (changes); This activity writes test in Chai, ensuring that the backend works with the API while ensuring you get a file back in .xls format (get the simple tests working). 

My challenge concerning these works is researching the topic of “Chai.” It explains that Chai is an assertion library written in JavaScript with different test frameworks. It allows maintenance of your code’s functionality and checks that it follows those assertions. It has the “assertions” style comparable to Node.js’s built-in assert module, and the “expect” style uses a chainable API to create more legible and expressive tests. Chai can be used with any testing framework, including Mocha, to define test suites with a specific feature. Each test in a test suite will state how your code should act.
I learned that it has additional chai-related dependencies after researching the topic. These include additions to npm install chai, chai-HTTP, chai-as-promise, etc. Those additions make the process simpler, but it doesn’t look good. It has already gone through the potentially functional aspects, even after the review, code addition/construction, and code comparison phases. However, the conjunction of some codes didn’t pass due to some missing information and led to some failures. 

To improve myself, I plan to seek information regarding this kind of assignment from members of my group and members of other groups by asking questions. It will serve as a learning experience. Even though the end of the year is getting close, I have seen that my abilities to manage time have increased, and the learning steps for work are becoming the assigned time. We ran into various technical issues during the development process, which resulted in delays; the team and I had a fantastic mid-round in finishing all of the items listed on the sprint backlog. These delays are different learning experiences that require better comprehension and learning new specialties to avoid those misconceptions and repeated attempts resulting from communication breakdowns. The problems may avoid by increasing knowledge and diving into the serious issue with the other group collaborating. 

In conclusion, in the second sprint, our team had good objectives and executed them, though we succeeded wildly better after the First-Sprint. We overcame some obstacles and learned about new topics while working through the complex pipeline and completing one of the assignments.

From the blog Andrew Lam’s little blog by Andrew Lam and used with permission of the author. All other rights reserved by the author.

Sprint-2

Hello, welcome to the Second-Sprint Retrospective Blog. I contributed to the group project by working on the tasks assigned on GitLab. I chose to complete one of the jobs, but it was more difficult than I had expected. I am currently participating in an activity that calls for additional alterations, and adding more details is more complicated than I had anticipated. It is up to the team and me to decide whether to put the modifications for the necessary measures. 

After the team and I adjusted to the issue board required for the work and practice. Completing this ISSUE Weight assignment with a total weight of 3 is reasonable and practicable. 

The Issue:
backend — write a test suite for API (changes); This activity writes test in Chai, ensuring that the backend works with the API while ensuring you get a file back in .xls format (get the simple tests working). 

My challenge concerning these works is researching the topic of “Chai.” It explains that Chai is an assertion library written in JavaScript with different test frameworks. It allows maintenance of your code’s functionality and checks that it follows those assertions. It has the “assertions” style comparable to Node.js’s built-in assert module, and the “expect” style uses a chainable API to create more legible and expressive tests. Chai can be used with any testing framework, including Mocha, to define test suites with a specific feature. Each test in a test suite will state how your code should act.
I learned that it has additional chai-related dependencies after researching the topic. These include additions to npm install chai, chai-HTTP, chai-as-promise, etc. Those additions make the process simpler, but it doesn’t look good. It has already gone through the potentially functional aspects, even after the review, code addition/construction, and code comparison phases. However, the conjunction of some codes didn’t pass due to some missing information and led to some failures. 

To improve myself, I plan to seek information regarding this kind of assignment from members of my group and members of other groups by asking questions. It will serve as a learning experience. Even though the end of the year is getting close, I have seen that my abilities to manage time have increased, and the learning steps for work are becoming the assigned time. We ran into various technical issues during the development process, which resulted in delays; the team and I had a fantastic mid-round in finishing all of the items listed on the sprint backlog. These delays are different learning experiences that require better comprehension and learning new specialties to avoid those misconceptions and repeated attempts resulting from communication breakdowns. The problems may avoid by increasing knowledge and diving into the serious issue with the other group collaborating. 

In conclusion, in the second sprint, our team had good objectives and executed them, though we succeeded wildly better after the First-Sprint. We overcame some obstacles and learned about new topics while working through the complex pipeline and completing one of the assignments.

From the blog Andrew Lam’s little blog by Andrew Lam and used with permission of the author. All other rights reserved by the author.

Sprint-2

Hello, welcome to the Second-Sprint Retrospective Blog. I contributed to the group project by working on the tasks assigned on GitLab. I chose to complete one of the jobs, but it was more difficult than I had expected. I am currently participating in an activity that calls for additional alterations, and adding more details is more complicated than I had anticipated. It is up to the team and me to decide whether to put the modifications for the necessary measures. 

After the team and I adjusted to the issue board required for the work and practice. Completing this ISSUE Weight assignment with a total weight of 3 is reasonable and practicable. 

The Issue:
backend — write a test suite for API (changes); This activity writes test in Chai, ensuring that the backend works with the API while ensuring you get a file back in .xls format (get the simple tests working). 

My challenge concerning these works is researching the topic of “Chai.” It explains that Chai is an assertion library written in JavaScript with different test frameworks. It allows maintenance of your code’s functionality and checks that it follows those assertions. It has the “assertions” style comparable to Node.js’s built-in assert module, and the “expect” style uses a chainable API to create more legible and expressive tests. Chai can be used with any testing framework, including Mocha, to define test suites with a specific feature. Each test in a test suite will state how your code should act.
I learned that it has additional chai-related dependencies after researching the topic. These include additions to npm install chai, chai-HTTP, chai-as-promise, etc. Those additions make the process simpler, but it doesn’t look good. It has already gone through the potentially functional aspects, even after the review, code addition/construction, and code comparison phases. However, the conjunction of some codes didn’t pass due to some missing information and led to some failures. 

To improve myself, I plan to seek information regarding this kind of assignment from members of my group and members of other groups by asking questions. It will serve as a learning experience. Even though the end of the year is getting close, I have seen that my abilities to manage time have increased, and the learning steps for work are becoming the assigned time. We ran into various technical issues during the development process, which resulted in delays; the team and I had a fantastic mid-round in finishing all of the items listed on the sprint backlog. These delays are different learning experiences that require better comprehension and learning new specialties to avoid those misconceptions and repeated attempts resulting from communication breakdowns. The problems may avoid by increasing knowledge and diving into the serious issue with the other group collaborating. 

In conclusion, in the second sprint, our team had good objectives and executed them, though we succeeded wildly better after the First-Sprint. We overcame some obstacles and learned about new topics while working through the complex pipeline and completing one of the assignments.

From the blog Andrew Lam’s little blog by Andrew Lam and used with permission of the author. All other rights reserved by the author.

Sprint-2

Hello, welcome to the Second-Sprint Retrospective Blog. I contributed to the group project by working on the tasks assigned on GitLab. I chose to complete one of the jobs, but it was more difficult than I had expected. I am currently participating in an activity that calls for additional alterations, and adding more details is more complicated than I had anticipated. It is up to the team and me to decide whether to put the modifications for the necessary measures. 

After the team and I adjusted to the issue board required for the work and practice. Completing this ISSUE Weight assignment with a total weight of 3 is reasonable and practicable. 

The Issue:
backend — write a test suite for API (changes); This activity writes test in Chai, ensuring that the backend works with the API while ensuring you get a file back in .xls format (get the simple tests working). 

My challenge concerning these works is researching the topic of “Chai.” It explains that Chai is an assertion library written in JavaScript with different test frameworks. It allows maintenance of your code’s functionality and checks that it follows those assertions. It has the “assertions” style comparable to Node.js’s built-in assert module, and the “expect” style uses a chainable API to create more legible and expressive tests. Chai can be used with any testing framework, including Mocha, to define test suites with a specific feature. Each test in a test suite will state how your code should act.
I learned that it has additional chai-related dependencies after researching the topic. These include additions to npm install chai, chai-HTTP, chai-as-promise, etc. Those additions make the process simpler, but it doesn’t look good. It has already gone through the potentially functional aspects, even after the review, code addition/construction, and code comparison phases. However, the conjunction of some codes didn’t pass due to some missing information and led to some failures. 

To improve myself, I plan to seek information regarding this kind of assignment from members of my group and members of other groups by asking questions. It will serve as a learning experience. Even though the end of the year is getting close, I have seen that my abilities to manage time have increased, and the learning steps for work are becoming the assigned time. We ran into various technical issues during the development process, which resulted in delays; the team and I had a fantastic mid-round in finishing all of the items listed on the sprint backlog. These delays are different learning experiences that require better comprehension and learning new specialties to avoid those misconceptions and repeated attempts resulting from communication breakdowns. The problems may avoid by increasing knowledge and diving into the serious issue with the other group collaborating. 

In conclusion, in the second sprint, our team had good objectives and executed them, though we succeeded wildly better after the First-Sprint. We overcame some obstacles and learned about new topics while working through the complex pipeline and completing one of the assignments.

From the blog Andrew Lam’s little blog by Andrew Lam and used with permission of the author. All other rights reserved by the author.

Sprint-2

Hello, welcome to the Second-Sprint Retrospective Blog. I contributed to the group project by working on the tasks assigned on GitLab. I chose to complete one of the jobs, but it was more difficult than I had expected. I am currently participating in an activity that calls for additional alterations, and adding more details is more complicated than I had anticipated. It is up to the team and me to decide whether to put the modifications for the necessary measures. 

After the team and I adjusted to the issue board required for the work and practice. Completing this ISSUE Weight assignment with a total weight of 3 is reasonable and practicable. 

The Issue:
backend — write a test suite for API (changes); This activity writes test in Chai, ensuring that the backend works with the API while ensuring you get a file back in .xls format (get the simple tests working). 

My challenge concerning these works is researching the topic of “Chai.” It explains that Chai is an assertion library written in JavaScript with different test frameworks. It allows maintenance of your code’s functionality and checks that it follows those assertions. It has the “assertions” style comparable to Node.js’s built-in assert module, and the “expect” style uses a chainable API to create more legible and expressive tests. Chai can be used with any testing framework, including Mocha, to define test suites with a specific feature. Each test in a test suite will state how your code should act.
I learned that it has additional chai-related dependencies after researching the topic. These include additions to npm install chai, chai-HTTP, chai-as-promise, etc. Those additions make the process simpler, but it doesn’t look good. It has already gone through the potentially functional aspects, even after the review, code addition/construction, and code comparison phases. However, the conjunction of some codes didn’t pass due to some missing information and led to some failures. 

To improve myself, I plan to seek information regarding this kind of assignment from members of my group and members of other groups by asking questions. It will serve as a learning experience. Even though the end of the year is getting close, I have seen that my abilities to manage time have increased, and the learning steps for work are becoming the assigned time. We ran into various technical issues during the development process, which resulted in delays; the team and I had a fantastic mid-round in finishing all of the items listed on the sprint backlog. These delays are different learning experiences that require better comprehension and learning new specialties to avoid those misconceptions and repeated attempts resulting from communication breakdowns. The problems may avoid by increasing knowledge and diving into the serious issue with the other group collaborating. 

In conclusion, in the second sprint, our team had good objectives and executed them, though we succeeded wildly better after the First-Sprint. We overcame some obstacles and learned about new topics while working through the complex pipeline and completing one of the assignments.

From the blog Andrew Lam’s little blog by Andrew Lam and used with permission of the author. All other rights reserved by the author.