Development Planning Meeting - 26th September 2012
Present: Alyson Shaw, Clive Davenhall, Brian Denholm, Jill Nicoll
Background:
New HR extract requirements have been raised, for imminent development. It is imperative to prevent conflicting code changes from being applied to the same code modules by different teams/resources.
This meeting therefore seeks:
- to identify and review all work-in-progress with impact on the HR extract
- to identify the environment(s) to which any code changes have been applied, and their current status
- to establish estimates of effort and elapsed time to complete all work-in-progress and publish it to Live
Meeting Note:
- UniDesk Calls (Brian)
1.1 Requirement changes:
I120406-0618 - continuous service start date
I120920-0694 - always pass a null value to PURE for Retirement date
1.2 Data issues, to be investigated – may require code changes:
I120916-0117 - ERRORS in the HR sync
I120130-0638 - one record with two affiliations, one of which has a daily-changing start date
I120417-0241 - four staff members with fte > 1
2. JIras (Clive)
Jira 241 - mainly involves other packages. However, as part of this Jira, Clive has temporarily removed some “miscreant code” from the ORG_PERSON package, as it was causing the refresh to hang. Clive has made no further changes to this package.
The “miscreant code” is part of Gaby’s work to resolve the missing person issue. It needs to be fixed and then reinstated.
3. Other (Gaby)
The meeting identified an indeterminate, but significant, quantity of code changes that had been applied by Gaby to from the ORG_PERSON package before his departure.
It is believed that:
- this code covered missing staff members (new HR and Visitor cursors) and error handling
- this code has been applied in BETA and TEST
- this code has not been tested, and has not been applied to LIVE
- there is a serious issue in the HR cursor added to this code (see item “miscreant code”, in item 2 above)
4. Recommendations:
It is recommended that no further changes be applied to the ORG_PERSON package until the “Gaby code” has been tested, signed off, and deployed to Live.
It is recommended that the Requirement Change UniDesk calls (see 1.1 above) be re-assigned to Config, and developed along with the Fixed Term Contract work.
5. Actions:
Description | Actioned on | Status |
Distribute the location of Gaby’s Implementation Plan | Clive | Done - K:\mis\dsg\Projects\RES037\ Implementation\Funding\ implementation_instructions.txt |
Send the “miscreant code” to Brian | Clive | Done |
Run a comparison of all three environments (Beta, Test, Live) and report back discrepancies between the three | Brian | Done - |
List all tables and packages that exist in Beta and/or Test but not in Live | Brian | Done (see link above) |
Run the “miscreant code” in Test and report whether it also crashes there | Brian |
|
Tell Defeng about the group’s concerns about the (unfinished?) “Gaby code | Jill | Done |
Find out whether anyone in Dev Tech is assigned to support PURE development | Jill | Done - nobody is assigned from Dev Tech |
Ask Adam to confirm the status of Gaby’s changes, and what needs to be done to get them to Live | Jill | Action ownership passed to Adam |
Ask Manya to clarify whether she wants the new requirements before the data issue investigations, or vice versa (explain that they can’t be done concurrently, as that would involve different teams both making changes to the same script) | Jill | Overtaken by events, while Manya on leave - new requirements take precedence |
Send meeting invitation to reconvene next Mon/Weds (note- Brian is on leave next week) | Jill | Done |