You are viewing an old version of this page. View the current version.

Compare with Current View Page History

« Previous Version 7 Next »


Meeting Date

Information that is gathered and tabulated in this page will be reviewed in the weekly DMS/SRDP Meeting:

October 7, 2020 1PM EDT  / 11AM MDT

Objectives of this Review/Retrospective

  • To review processes used in preparation for and during the RH7 (and associated software) upgrade to the VLASS dev/test/prod environments.
  • To improve processes as we prepare for future similar work.
  • To encourage everyone on the team to engage in process improvement
  • To review what went well and what did not
  • To identify processes and practices that should either change or be discontinued
  • To establish concrete steps to address each item reviewed

Scope of this Review/Retrospective

  • Overall upgrade process
  • Communication
  • Post-upgrade bug identification
  • Ongoing development during upgrade.
  • Processes used for infrastructure deployment and maintenance in dev, test, and production

Roses and Thorns Retrospective Approach

    • Roses:              What is working?
    • Thorns:            What is not working?
    • Buds:               What opportunities can we explore?
    • Fertilizer:         Improvements on existing processes, support for new idea

  • The list has been structured using a "Roses and Thorns" approach
  • The document above is below, ready for comments and edits.
  • Everyone on the team is encouraged to make edits directly, please forward this request to your team members and leads
  • The edited document will be discussed and reviewed in the weekly DMS/SRDP meeting on October 7, 2020

Outcome

There is no pass/fail criteria.  An action plan will be incorporated into the document following the meeting and the Project Manager will track and follow up action items.


IDRosesThornsBudsFertilizer
MG-1What went well?What could have gone better?What opportunities can we explore?Improvements on existing processes, support for new ideas.
JK-1Staged testing and rollout yielded are relatively painless transition from the user perspective.


JK-2
Testing coordination could have been better.We could reuse more of the SRDP process even though this was a mostly internal effort.There is a balance to be struck between planning and doing.  Do we think we got that correct this time around?
JK-3A lot of cleanup and transition to CIS supported infrastructure was accomplished.Effort required was greater than anticipated.
Was there scope creep with this effort?  Were we intentional about allowing it?
MLReconfiguration of profiles in the production areas resulted in a more logical test/production directory structure.Communication of this change to the operations team needed to be better.Could look into ways to improve communications with entire Ops+DA team (both sites) for issues affecting SRDP Ops.



































  • No labels