CS448 Software Development Capstone – Sprint 2 Retrospective

Throughout Sprint 2, which began at the start of March and was divided by our week of Spring Break, our team tried to spread our work out across several of the repositories in Thea’s Pantry instead of focusing on just one. Our tasks in each repository were centered around making sure the linter extensions were configured correctly in the Gitpod workspace, and that these same extensions would be included in the Gitlab pipeline whenever a new push is made to the repository.

These tasks were more difficult in some repositories than others. Repositories that had received more attention in the recent past required little work or reconfiguration in order to run the ‘lint.sh’ shell script and have no errors reported in the Gitpod terminal. Most of the issues that I encountered were with the formatting of developer documents. These files were reviewed by the ‘markdownlint-cli2’ linter, which has a set of rules that it expects the markdown files written by the developer to follow. These rules include a limit on the character length of each line and a restriction on trailing spaces, which I found were the two most common issues I needed to address in the developer documents.

One prominent difficulty I had in configuring each linter was learning where in the repository each extension looked for exceptions to their built-in rules. The ‘markdownlint-cli2’ extension had its own file in the root of the directory, as did a few others including ‘alexJS’. Other linter extensions had more obscure locations; the frustratingly similarly named ‘markdown-link-check’ needed additional arguments to be added to its invocation within the ‘lint.sh’ script, and not written in a distinct file in the repository like most other linters. Each member of our group discovered the necessity of modifying the linting shell script after running our initial ‘npm install’ commands. This command creates a hidden directory in the root of our repository called ‘node_modules’, which contains files related to the extensions we have installed as project dependencies. However, if we attempted to run the ‘lint.sh’ script without explicitly ignoring the ‘node_modules’ directory, some of our linters, the ‘markdown-link-check’ especially, would run for a prohibitively long time reviewing files in the ‘node_modules’ directory. Since the ‘node_modules’ directory contains files written by developers outside of the Thea’s Pantry project, it isn’t our responsibility to lint these files.

One special responsibility that I had for this sprint was to research the Mocha testing framework and Chai assertion library for later use in Thea’s Pantry. The ‘GuestInfoBackend’ repository already had a functioning test framework, and I used that as a model for adding Mocha and Chai as dependencies to the ‘InventoryBackend’ repository. My first task in the ‘InventoryBackend’ repository was to create a ‘testing/test-runner’ directory which would hold the package files and unit tests utilized by Mocha and Chai. Then, I was able to install Mocha and Chai in this subdirectory through the npm utility. Once I had installed all the files, I needed to modify the ‘test.sh’ shell script to call the Mocha framework. I got caught in the weeds at one point because I thought that the ‘docker-compose-test-runner.yaml’ file would create the Dockerfile, and I didn’t know whether this Dockerfile was supposed to be manually created or edited by the developer. I resolved this issue with the help of Professor Wurst by copying the Dockerfile present in ‘GuestInfoBackend’ and modifying it to meet the needs of ‘InventoryBackend’.

There were a few more steps to go before successfully integrating Mocha and Chai into ‘InventoryBackend’, including adding an ‘entrypoint.sh’ into the ‘test-runner’ subdirectory, as well as installing Yarn as an additional dependency. After my ‘lint.sh’ was returning no errors, I had to add the ‘test’ stage to the Gitlab pipeline. In the previous sprint, I thought that adding pipeline components was something our group would need to ask permission for, and only realized near the end that we actually had that capability as developers through the ‘.gitlab-cli.yaml’ file. Armed with that knowledge in this sprint, I realized that all I needed to do to enable the ‘test’ stage in the ‘InventoryBackend’ pipeline, was to remove the ‘test’ argument from the ‘disabled stages’ field.

One thing that I think our group could improve on is our review process before pushing our work to the main branch. What we’ll usually do when one of us is ready to create a merge request for our branch, is pick another one of our group members that we haven’t asked to review our previous merge request and have them approve the changes and remove the ‘draft’ marking from the merge request. What I looked for as a reviewer was whether all the pipeline stages passed, primarily. In the future, if we are working on configuring linters again, I think it would be best to have an example of working linter configurations to compare our changes against. This way, I think we would spend less time untangling the proverbial knots that the linters are catching on, and we would also avoid the possibility of introducing breaking changes to the repository.

Work:

Reviewed Mocha and Chai documentation for integration into ‘InventoryBackend’ repository

Configuring linters and Gitlab pipeline in ‘InventoryIntegration’

Added Mocha test framework and Chai assertion library as developer dependencies to ‘InventoryBackend’

Add Yarn as developer dependency to ‘InventoryBackend’, in the process of integrating Mocha and Chai

Configuring linters and Gitlab pipeline in ‘ReportingBackend’

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

Sprint 2 Retrospective

I felt like I went into this sprint confident that the tasks we planned to approach at the start would go well based off of what we learned from the first sprint. To start the sprint off our team met with Team 1 on Discord. We discussed what we learned about frontend testing, including vues and how to build a frontend in gitpod. This is where that confidence was immediately squashed when I began to realize the depth involved with setting up all the linters for a frontend and linting all of the files.

During the entirety of the sprint I was stuck tackling this one issue; setting up linters in GuestInfoFrontend. This issue was originally weighed by the team as a 2 based on everyone linting their repositories in the previous sprint. Come to find out, linting a fully built front end can take some time.

The initial Issue I ran into was understanding how to enable each linter in the pipeline. The main reason I failed to properly lint the GuestInfoFrontend in the previous sprint was that I never enabled the linters. To make sure I had every linter I needed I read the documentation for each linter and picked ones that linted any file that existed in the frontend. The linters I used were alexjs, cspell, hadolint, lint-package-json, markdown-link-check, markdownlint-cli2, shellcheck, spectral, eslint, htmlhint, and style lint. 

Eslint, htmlhint and style lint didn’t end up working with the pipeline and were removed. Issues were made under each of their respective repositories detailing the error message. Eslint still worked locally, so linting was still able to be done to the files.

As for the other linters, I was able to learn a decent amount about configuring rules for each one of them. This includes understanding what to name the config file, how to format the rules, and what rules exist. Unfortunately It turns out that the rules I created are only checked locally, which makes sense. So my files would still fail the pipeline without the proper lint ignore comments. This was something I tried to avoid at all cost, as it just feels like a cheap and easy fix. That being said I look forward to maybe taking my proposed rules further up the pipeline.

The team’s communication was again the best part of the sprint. There were times where one of us would get stuck or fall behind. Having them communicate what is going on allows the rest of the team to be aware of the situation and adjust accordingly. 

As a team we have noticed that there have been issues that essentially have child issues. These child issues get overlooked when we are weighing the issues before the start of the sprint. In my case where I was stuck on one issue, if it was originally built as the 9 separate issues I could have been easily divided up amongst the team. At the very least it would have reflected progress being made on the issue board.

Another improvement we can make is our documentation. Although we do a great job relaying information internally, it is important to remember that we are not the only team that will see these issues. Having comments explaining why we did what we did or sources for where we got our information can assist others who look at the issue.

At some point during the sprint I installed at least one package in the wrong directory. There were times this was done because I didn’t know any better, and others by accident because I just forgot to move the working directory. This created many issues and a mess of unnecessary files. Moving forward I need to double check the working directory before installing. Not only this, but having better commits could help revert back to before the installation. Overall this has given me a better appreciation for the power of git commits and its record keeping. 

Meet with Team 1 to discuss frontend testing:

https://gitlab.com/LibreFoodPantry/client-solutions/theas-pantry/guestinfosystem/guestinfofrontend/-/issues/96

Set up linters and lint the GuestInfoFrontend repository:
https://gitlab.com/LibreFoodPantry/client-solutions/theas-pantry/guestinfosystem/guestinfofrontend/-/issues/95 

From the blog CS@Worcester – CS Learning by kbourassa18 and used with permission of the author. All other rights reserved by the author.

Code Review

Although I wasn’t present for the class in which code reviewing was introduced, it seems like a pretty simple topic to understand. It consists of… well, reviewing code; the only thing is, it can’t be done alone. Code review’s core and effectiveness lies in cooperation with others, where two or more people are required to even attempt code review. Of course, you can literally “code review,” as in, you review your own code but this refers to something more. 

What does it mean to review when it comes to code? Well, everyone is human, for the most part, and humans are prone to mistakes; and in the case of developers, these end up as bugs, errors, and everything in between. Code review allows others to look through one’s code to find these mishaps that the original developers may have missed or overlooked. I am also human and have had many cases in which I get stuck and have to ask a friend to look through my code just for them to point out something so simple and easy to spot yet I managed to miss. 

Code reviews encompass not only the spotting of mistakes but also the improvement of overall code, so as to have a better, more-refined end product before merging and such. This improvement of overall code includes but is not limited to structure, cohesion, cleanliness, and readability. Clean code is something that I hadn’t heard of until somewhat recently, so that aspect of my code from the past and even now can be improved upon heavily and would be greatly appreciated. 

Code reviews are usually chances for the one being reviewed to correct their mistakes and improve their code but there is also an opportunity for the reviewer to learn. The reviewer may encounter new techniques, solutions, and perspectives through this process, ultimately benefiting both reviewer and reviewee. 

One of the major downsides to code review is that the length and content of them depends entirely on the length of the code; and code can get to some very large sizes. The time spent reviewing especially large code could potentially be put into the current project, workflow, or what have you. 

As someone who is not so confident in their coding skill and proficiency, I believe that code reviews are great opportunities to learn and improve, which will in turn improve my confidence in my skill. There is much to be gained with code review and the downsides seem to only apply to much larger projects; so as a student and novice developer, they will be great to implement to my learning.

https://medium.com/@priyanthinisivasubramaniyam/everything-to-know-about-code-review-as-a-beginner-2a360cdd89ca

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

“Draw Your Own Map” Individual Apprenticeship Pattern

This week, I decided to focus on the “Draw Your Own Map” Individual Apprenticeship Pattern for CS448-Software Capstone. This is my final required apprenticeship pattern analysis post, and I chose this pattern because it feels applicable to me as I am about to graduate and enter the working environment, mapping out my intended career path from its starting point. 

The “Draw Your Own Map” individual apprenticeship pattern emphasizes the importance of taking control of one’s career development and learning journey. It encourages individuals to proactively chart their own course rather than relying solely on predefined paths or external guidance.

At its core, this pattern advocates for self-directed learning. It urges individuals to actively seek out opportunities to acquire new skills, knowledge, and experiences that align with their career aspirations. Setting personal goals is essential in this process, providing a roadmap for growth and development.

Identifying various learning opportunities, both formal and informal, is crucial for professional advancement. This could include attending workshops, pursuing certifications, participating in projects, or seeking mentorship. Adaptability and flexibility are also key, as career paths may require adaptation and adjustment over time.

Regular reflection on progress is encouraged to refine goals and adjust course as needed. By reflecting on past experiences and learning outcomes, individuals can iterate and improve their development strategies. Additionally, building a personal brand and reputation within the industry is essential for showcasing skills, expertise, and achievements.

In essence, the “Draw Your Own Map” pattern empowers individuals to navigate their professional journey with autonomy, self-reflection, and continuous learning. By embracing ownership of their career trajectories, individuals can pursue their long-term goals with purpose and resilience.

With such a competitive entry-level environment, it is possible that I may find myself (or at a later point in my career) choosing to take a position that may not fully align with my interests and career goals. Additionally, with all of the ongoing changes in the tech industry and world as a whole, what may have been a traditional and common career path is impractical today. So, it’s crucial that I can draw my own map to success and redraw it as necessary throughout my career. By following the strategies outlined in this apprenticeship pattern, it seems a lot more realistic to be able to take a starting position that may be less-than-ideal while still progressing toward my intended goal.

Sources: Hoover, Dave, and Adewale Oshineye. “Apprenticeship Patterns: Guidance for the Aspiring Software Craftsman.” O’Reilly Media, 2009.

From the blog CS@Worcester – Tech. Worth Talking About by jelbirt and used with permission of the author. All other rights reserved by the author.

Sprint Retrospective

Sprint 2 Retrospective

Introduction

  • In this sprint we were focused on scaling up our productivity and getting the UI underway.
  • This sprint lasted longer than sprint 1 but ended up feeling very back heavy because we were delayed on working on the front end until we had access to the new template.

Links to Activity on GitLab

Reflections on the Sprint

What Worked Well?
  • Like the last, In this sprint I found that communication as a group was key to our success. Any problems that we faced were made much easier when we tackled them as a group instead of alone. I think that our review process was good and allowed us to effectively tackle our goals.
What Didn’t Work Well?
  • I think that the main thing that we struggled with was managing the time of this sprint, considering that we were halted in our efforts to make the front end until we had a working template to base ours off of. In the end we got it done after a busy end of sprint.

Improvements for Team Performance

The team’s ability to communicate and tackle problems collectively was a strong point during this sprint. It was an effective carry over from the last sprint and will hopefully be reflected in the next sprint as well with some of the following improvements:

  1. Keep a consistent schedule: In hopes to avoid a repeat of the last sprint where everything was stacked at the back of the sprint, It would be beneficial to manage our time better as a group with a more consistent meeting time.
  2. Division of Labor: we continue to ensure that one person does not get stacked with to much to do while others get left with little to work on.
  3. Streamlined Communication Channels: Same as the last sprint, ensuring that all discussions, especially those related to problem-solving and decision-making, are logged in an accessible and organized manner would help maintain clarity and continuity.

Personal Improvements

Reflecting on my personal challenges during this sprint, specifically around managing merge requests correctly, I see valuable opportunities for growth:

  1. Gitlab Use: I still struggle with some aspects of gitlab and hope to improve that for sprint 3.
  2. Proactive Communication: To prevent and swiftly address any uncertainties or errors in my work, I commit to being more proactive in seeking feedback and clarifications from team members.

From the blog CS@Worcester – Abe's Programming Blog by Abraham Passmore and used with permission of the author. All other rights reserved by the author.

Sprint 2 planning

Throughout our team discussions, we addressed several key points:

Some tasks (OL-1) weren’t completed by another group, who claimed they were done or unnecessary. We need to inform the professor (#26).

We need to ensure that the guestinfofrontend knows which server address it’s using. Adjusting the Gitpod ci.yaml file can help with this.

The backend server is encountering issues and isn’t running properly, especially affecting weight increment functionalities.

Creating a Gitpod initialization task will automate setting up the workspace’s address, streamlining our workflow.

We should utilize environment variables to manage URLs, distinguishing between local and Gitpod environments for better configuration.

Setting a backend base URL will prevent hardcoding and make it easier for the frontend to access.

We need to troubleshoot module not found errors, which may be related to exports or syntax issues.

Enhancing our debugging capabilities with JavaScript tools will improve error detection and resolution.

Conducting experiments and documenting findings will help guide our future actions and decisions.

Thorough documentation is crucial for the benefit of future teams, especially if time is limited.

We must prepare for presentations during exams, focusing on showcasing our team’s progress.

Improving our planning and testing processes will lead to smoother project execution and fewer setbacks.

Providing clear integration examples and deployment instructions will facilitate seamless implementation.

Utilizing collaborative tools will enhance efficiency in task management and communication.

Lastly, we should compile promising solutions into a shortlist for further evaluation and consideration.

From the blog CS@Worcester – THE SOLID by isaacstephencs and used with permission of the author. All other rights reserved by the author.

Chapter 2 of “Apprenticeship Patterns: Guidance for the Aspiring Software Craftsman”.

In Chapter 2 of “Apprenticeship Patterns: Guidance for the Aspiring Software Craftsman,” called “Emptying the Cup,” the focus is on the notion that effective learning requires individuals to recognize and accept their current shortcomings and biases. The chapter emphasizes the significance of maintaining an open mind and welcoming new concepts, even when they contradict what one already knows.

In the opening of the chapter, the idea of an “empty cup” is explained using a story about a martial arts student who seeks guidance from a master. However, the student’s mind is already filled with his own beliefs and assumptions, making it difficult for the master to impart knowledge effectively. The student must metaphorically empty his cup, shedding his preconceived notions, to be receptive to genuine learning.

The key lesson is to embrace humility and openness in career advancement, acknowledging constant room for improvement and discarding outdated habits, assumptions, and biases to facilitate growth.

The chapter offers useful guidance on how to embrace the concept of “emptying the cup” by urging readers to actively pursue experiences that push the boundaries of their current understanding and beliefs. This might entail taking on projects that are unfamiliar, soliciting input from colleagues, or deliberately practicing to enhance skills in weaker areas.

What’s interesting about this chapter is its emphasis on the importance of mindset in the learning process. It underscores that achieving mastery isn’t solely about amassing information and abilities, but also hinges on cultivating a receptive attitude toward learning and development. Embracing the notion of the “empty cup,” readers are motivated to approach their evolution as software craftsmen with curiosity, humility, and an open-minded outlook.

This chapter proves useful as it provides actionable methods for overcoming cognitive biases and constraints that may hinder personal development. By acknowledging the significance of embracing new perspectives, readers can foster a mindset conducive to ongoing progress and expertise. This approach can enhance creativity, innovation, and effectiveness in software development, while also fostering personal fulfillment and satisfaction in one’s professional endeavors. Ultimately, “Emptying the Cup” serves as a beneficial reminder of the essential role humility and open-mindedness play in striving for excellence.

Reflecting on Chapter 2 of “Apprenticeship Patterns,” I recognize the need to critically assess my choice of programming language. Considering factors like ecosystem, learning style alignment, and industry relevance, I understand that my initial assumptions may require reassessment. Embracing this change in perspective prompts a more intentional approach to learning, potentially leading to greater mastery and fulfillment in my profession.

From the blog CS@Worcester – THE SOLID by isaacstephencs and used with permission of the author. All other rights reserved by the author.

CS448 – Sprint 2 Retrospective

Our second of three sprints for CS448 – Software Development Capstone concluded and was reviewed last Tuesday (4/7/2024). My team worked very well together this sprint and we helped each other as we stayed flexible and adaptable as changes were rolled out that affected our repo and issues. Additionally, most of our issues focused on FrontEnd tasks including the design, development,  and integration of a user interface for the CheckoutGuestFrontend repo. UI design and particularly implementing Vue.js framework was mostly unfamiliar for our group, so we learned a lot from what we accomplished this sprint.

While we didn’t quite finish all of our initially planned tasks, we did successfully reorganize issues into smaller/more manageable and defined issues mid-sprint and we completed all of our issues up to testing the front-end we built:

“Get in touch with Team: 01-2 and discuss Frontend Tests and their findings” – When we took on the task of developing the CheckoutGuestFrontend repo, we found Team 2 had already taken on some responsibilities and begun researching front-end testing. So our first order of business was holding a meeting with them to decide on a starting point for our group. Our notes from the meeting are recorded here.

https://gitlab.com/LibreFoodPantry/client-solutions/theas-pantry/guestinfosystem/guestinfofrontend/-/issues/92

“Review GUI Mockup” – For this task, we all met as a group to go over a basic on-paper mockup of what we envisioned and had in mind for the CheckoutGuestFrontend GUI and break down the task of coding the GUI into smaller, more manageable and well-defined issues. In the issue, we document our hand-written mock-up as well as our meeting notes and the smaller issues we refactored to. The “Consider Interaction Boundaries” and “Modify/Improve GUI Framework” issues were encompassed in the preparation and execution of this Review task.

https://gitlab.com/LibreFoodPantry/client-solutions/theas-pantry/inventorysystem/checkoutguestfrontend/-/issues/45

https://gitlab.com/LibreFoodPantry/client-solutions/theas-pantry/inventorysystem/checkoutguestfrontend/-/issues/44

https://gitlab.com/LibreFoodPantry/client-solutions/theas-pantry/inventorysystem/checkoutguestfrontend/-/issues/42

Main issue:

“Coding UI to place components on the screen where we want them (“layout”)” – This task encompasses the overall processes of creating the Vue.js, integration, and other resource files and code to actually implement our mock-up. This was our first time working with Vue.js, and we are also less experienced with JavaScript as compared to other languages like Java and Python, so we hit some setbacks and delays as we explored and learned more about using these. There were also some minor steps involving communication protocols that were learning experiences.

Another obstacle we traversed involving this issue is the rollout of the new frontend model by Dr. Wurst. When we first tackled this problem, it was not yet released so we struggled to get a working baseline/framework to edit and build off of.

https://gitlab.com/LibreFoodPantry/client-solutions/theas-pantry/inventorysystem/checkoutguestfrontend/-/issues/43

“General – Verifying that all Thea’s Pantry projects have the correct extensions, linters, and pipeline stages” – This was a task from last sprint which we did not quite complete. This sprint we finished it up by verifying the necessary components. Once the working model was rolled out, we managed to build ours out to a stable state with an attractive UI by holding several full-team code reviews. https://gitlab.com/LibreFoodPantry/client-solutions/theas-pantry/gitlab-profile/-/issues/12 

In review, our second sprint for CS448 – Software Development Capstone was driven by patience, teamwork and adaptability. Despite encountering challenges, particularly in navigating unfamiliar territory with UI design and Vue.js implementation, we emerged stronger and more knowledgeable. While we didn’t fully complete all initially planned tasks, our ability to reorganize issues mid-sprint into smaller, more manageable ones allowed us to focus on essential aspects. Key achievements included productive collaborations with Team 01-2 on frontend testing, thorough review and refinement of GUI mockups, and overcoming hurdles in coding the UI with Vue.js. We also successfully addressed pending tasks from the previous sprint, ensuring all projects within Thea’s Pantry ecosystem met required standards.

From the blog CS@Worcester – Tech. Worth Talking About by jelbirt and used with permission of the author. All other rights reserved by the author.

Sprint 2 Retrospective

This was our second sprint of the semester and I would say we definitely did better in some aspects as a team while we still need to work on other aspects. I personally worked on one issue on my own while we did all the other issues completed during the sprint as a team during our meetings. These issues included ensuring the proper linters and pipeline stages in a repo, researching how to write vue code and implementing said code as well as developing the frontend with buttons and input fields to prepare for a confirmation page next sprint. Our group issue that we completed included researching vue as well as redesigning the wireframe for the addInventory frontend.

Overall I did not have any trouble with my individual issue during this sprint. My issue I worked on regarding the addition of linters and pipeline stages was straightforward and I was able to complete it without much delay as there were not many issues in any of the files after implementation of the necessary linters. The first issue that we worked on as a team regarding the research of vue code and making an example button also went well and did not take us long during our meeting. The second issue we worked on as a team included working on the frontend which was rather challenging as we do not have much experience with the frontend between us but we were able to add two buttons along with input fields in order to have a displayable frontend. Our last issue as a team was to redesign the wireframe for the frontend in order to prepare for sprint 3 which went very well as we are planning on adding a second page to the frontend which confirms the addition to the inventory.

We did not have many problems during this sprint but I still feel as though there are things we could work on to improve as a team. One thing we can improve on is everyone making it to scheduled meetings, during the sprint we had meetings where we were not all in attendance and the team members in attendance did not know that others would not be making it to the meeting so I believe we need to work on communicating more when it comes to having to be absent from a meeting so the team knows what to expect. Another problem we had during the sprint was being willing to ask for help when needed, although we all have little experience when it comes to frontend coding we still can bounce ideas off of each other in order to work through issues faster as it is more useful to the team if we all understand what we are working on and we all agreed when writing our working agreement that we would all be available and willing to help eachother or answer questions as needed. In my opinion we worked well together during our second sprint and I hope we are able to work together even better during our final sprint of the semester.

Issues worked on:

Verifying that all Thea’s Pantry projects have the correct extensions, linters, and pipeline stages – CheckInventoryFrontend

https://gitlab.com/LibreFoodPantry/client-solutions/theas-pantry/inventorysystem/checkinventoryfrontend/-/issues/35

Research code for `button` implementation in Vue and HTML

https://gitlab.com/LibreFoodPantry/client-solutions/theas-pantry/inventorysystem/addinventoryfrontend/-/issues/40

Develop `Submit` button Vue and HTML files

https://gitlab.com/LibreFoodPantry/client-solutions/theas-pantry/inventorysystem/addinventoryfrontend/-/issues/45

From the blog CS@Worcester – Dylan Brown Computer Science by dylanbrowncs and used with permission of the author. All other rights reserved by the author.

Sprint Retrospective #2

Overall I think the second sprint went well. Like the last sprint, I think we all did a good job of keeping each other updated and asking each other questions if we became stuck. For this sprint, we worked on a lot of the issues as a group. We also were open enough to communicate with each other when we realized that issues may not have been merged for a long period after being reviewed. Unfortunately, there were a couple of times when we didn’t keep up with issues that were in the “Needs Review” column. This resulted in a lot of merge conflicts that need to be resolved for those issues. We continued to display aspects of the original description of the culture we wanted in the working agreement: open-mindedness, honesty, respect, and accountability. We decided how much weight everyone should try to complete to divide the work evenly and fairly before the sprint started and we kept to it for the most part.

I worked on multiple issues that involved verifying that the pantry projects had the correct extensions, linters, and pipeline stages. For this issue, we examined the file types on the project, made a list of linters that were needed based on the files, added any linters, made sure the new linters passed, checked which stages were needed, and fixed the stages accordingly. I worked on verification for GuestInfoBackend, GuestInfoAPI, and GuestInfoSystem/General. I worked on the first two issues with the group and worked on verifying GuestInfoSystem/General by myself. We also had an issue for talking to group 3 about InventoryFrontend and InventoryBackend because they decided to work on some issues for it. Towards the end of the sprint, I realized they didn’t reach out so our group initiated a conversation to confirm if they were all set. Once that conversation finished I moved that issue to the done column. I also worked on reviewing the issue for getting InventoryBackend test working and getting the InventorySystem General test and build working. The issue for getting the InventoryBackend working was an issue that was left in the  “Needs Review” column for an extended amount of time and needed an extensive amount of work to resolve merge conflicts.

As a team, I think we did fairly well but we needed to keep up with the issues that need review more. We also did not rotate reviewing issues as we originally planned when creating our working agreement and or set up a system that will ensure that there aren’t certain people who are reviewing the majority of issues. Because a lot of the issues involved us working together, we didn’t address how we would make sure to stay on track of issues that needed review. As an individual, I need to make sure I can review issues as soon as possible to prevent the possibility of having a team member work through multiple merge conflicts. I think as a group we could benefit from a specific plan for keeping up with completed issues. For the next sprint, I plan on picking a schedule to check on the needs review column.

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.