2020-02-08
Retrospective
What went well?
- A working prototype ready for Control Loop demo which can act as base.
- Communication between components, Test bed is ready.
- Teams understanding on control loop design is improved when compared to initial days.
- Team gained fair understanding on ONAP & Policy design and test environment, tools and procedures involved.
- Better defined and stronger code base at present. Less subject to structural change, also easier to onboard and follow for new members.
- As time went on commits became smaller and more frequent. Easier to code review, merge and pay more attention to.
- The idea of having a Wiki Page is good
- Demos are really good to show progress
Where can we improve?
- Integration tests between different components can be started early and in parallel.
- Code reviews to be strict and strengthened
- A code review checklist can be maintained (including checkstyles, coverage, tests done, functionality covered, pending work , definition of done etc), we pushed code that did not build and did not have tests.
- Internal demos can be started and made more frequent, when there is a demoable component.
- Dedicated page of instructions for new joiners for Checkstyle/SONAR etc.
- Good knowledge of Policy and the Policy Framework codebase and practices work.
- Add good descriptions of the reason for a commit and an explanation of the commit in comments in the review
- How does our architecture align with the existing CLAMP springboot approach?
- Understand the architectural path into the future.
Overall:
- Wiki page should be updated and kept aligned before design start, as component functionality can be agreed among all. +
- Jira tickets can be updated with new subtasks, an acceptance criteria defined and agreed per sub-task
- Jira Tickets can be updated with progress and gerrit links, if acceptable.
By Component:
Participant:
1. Integration testing should be started along lines of code, and should be a daily practice instead of just relying on Junits.
Commissioning:
1. Interaction between Commissioning and Instantiation should be defined more clearly.
Improvements
Overall:
By Component:
- Commissioning:
- Get the unit tests done
- Probably introduce some unit ''integration tests'' with instantiation, CSITs
- Redefine the API's needed. Exact GET's needed + checks to introduce, What do we actually need?
- Pushing of control loop component definitions to participants? Flow of how you get from a commissioned control loop definition to an instantiated control loop.
- Monitoring:
- Monitoring and supervision functionality interchanged. Needs to be updated in the wiki.
- Need to finalize the statistics data for participants and Control loop elements. Also need to decide, if we require to implement association between statistics classes and parent.
- GUI for monitoring?
Considerations
PMSH implementation
Participant implementations for DCAE/Policy/CDS
Using existing CLAMP functionality to bridge between commissioning and instantiation.
Checking and validation
Refactoring Supervision Handling
Refactoring Participant as a JAR
Rough GUI/Client
Design time?
Architecture/Design wiki page, or official documentation?
Others?
Decisions
Stick with the Wiki for documentation and convert to RST later.