lab08 : Inter-Team Eval Response, Start Manual, User Stories and Issues towards Final Release, Retro 3

num ready? description assigned due
lab08 true Inter-Team Eval Response, Start Manual, User Stories and Issues towards Final Release, Retro 3 Fri 02/28 01:00PM Fri 03/07 11:59PM
Points

Graded: (lab08-T) (30 pts) For joint team review of all received comments and compiling a team response report to the team eval last Wednesday in a team/evaluation/EVAL_RESPONSE.md file in your team repo. The report should be created in response to the peer feedback you received and should contain all items indicated on the lect14 notes.

Graded: (lab08-T) (30 pts) You earn these team points if you started a user manual document that you link to in your Github docs/MANUAL.md and that contains at the very least a description of the product purpose, lists the intended user audience, and has section headings (which are allowed to change until the final material submission deadline) with placeholder information (could even be Lorem Ipsum text for now) that document (or in the future will document) the various features of your product and how to operate them (with the final version using plenty of screenshots - for now, you can just put placeholders as is most convenient for you).

Graded: (lab08-I) (25 pts) Team starts documenting (coordinating on one response or by submitting individual commentary) team roles and github contributions in team/contributions/CONTRIBS.md(see below).

Graded: (lab08-T) (15 pts) You earn these team points based on the attendance/participation in your third and last retrospective some time over the next week as fits your Sprint cycle

Start User Manual Document

Start a User Manual Document (as a Google Doc or another living document format of your choice) and link to it in a new ./docs/MANUAL.md file in your GitHub. It should start with a paragraph explaining the purpose and intended user audience for the product (it can share some of this information with your README.MD, but the manual should be entirely oriented towards end users and should make no mention of implementation details that are not relevant to the end user experience).

Team Roles and Github Contributions

We ask every team to comment on the code contributions that every team member made. You already documented leadership roles within the team management (in team/LEADERSHIP.md), and now we ask you to document the roles the team members played in the code development effort. You can comment on team contributions other than coding as well. In your github team folder, please create a contributions subfolder.

This lab just requires you to start the document in team/contributions/CONTRIBS.md, but you have until the final materials submissions deadline to update and edit it:
Document and write commentary on team member code (and/or other) contributions in team/contributions/CONTRIBS.md: each team member should initially write their own section.

Is the Contributors graph accurate?

Note that there can be disparities between the contributors graph and ground truth code contributions by teeam members. Some groups may have chosen to follow a pair programming approach, and consistently only one member may have done the commits. Or a team member may have used different github accounts when interacting with the code base. Whatever the situation, it is too late to fix the commits, but it’s NOT too late to offer an explanation in your team/contributions/CONTRIBS.md commentary.

If the data and the explanation match, it’s all good.

If you have a team member that you know or suspect has made lots of commits that are not being attributed to them, scroll through your commit log and see if you can find a few examples.

If the commits look ok, but don’t tell the full story (e.g. a team member may have just contributed very few, but very important commits), you can bring that out in your commentary, too.

Even distribution of the coding effort among all team members is definitely not expected, but highly uneven contributions, especially when paired with potential team dissatisfaction expressed through the catme.org surveys is grounds for individual weighting of the project grade component among team members.

Third (and last) Retrospective

Hold your third and last team Scrum Retrospective during this lab. We suggest that you do this either on Wed., 03/05, or on Fri, 03/07. Make sure you have a Retro leader assigned (should be the case since it was part of the Leadership review last lab).

You already know the goal and procedure for Retrospectives from your RETRO_01 and RETRO_02. This Retrospective allows you to discuss things that are relevant on your final stretch to product deployment, documentation, and presentation. Instead of designing an experiment this time, review what worked and what didn’t from previous meetings, and make strong commitments towards the final stretch of product development towards launch!

  # Retrospective your-nr-goes-here, date-goes-here 

  * Led by: name-goes-here
  * Present: name1, name2, ... , nameN
  * Absent: name1, name2, ...