Data Flow Software Configuration Control Board
















Data‐Flow
Software


Configuration
Control
Board








GEN‐SPE‐ESO‐______
 
 
 Issue
1.02

 25/02/2011
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Released:
 F.Comeron
 
 
 
 A.Kaufer
 
 
 
 B.Leibundgut
 M.Peron
 
 
 25/02/2011
 
 
 
 



 
 
 Name
 
 
 
 Date
 
 
 
 Signature





1.

INTRODUCTION


1.1

Background


The
internal
memorandum
dated
17/11/2010
on
the
subject
Data‐flow
software
(DFS)
development
projects


defines
the
role
of
the
DFS
Configuration
Control
Board,
in
particular
in
the
following
cases:


•
Requests
 for
 operationally
 critical
 updates
 (including
 regular
 maintenance
 updates
 and
 bug
 fixes)
 of
 operational
data
flow
applications
must
be
submitted
for
evaluation
and
approval
to
the
DFS
Configuration
 Control
Board
via
the
DFS
problem
reporting
system


•
Changes
 of
 project
 deadlines
 must
 be
 submitted
 for
 evaluation
 and
 approval
 to
 the
 DFS
 Configuration
 Control
Board
via
the
DFS
problem
reporting
system


The
 same
 memorandum
 also
 states
 that
 by
 the
 end
 of
 2010
 the
 charter
 and
 composition
 of
 the
 DFS
 Configuration
Control
Board
shall
be
defined
and
that
the
DFS
Configuration
Control
Board
will
be
acting
as
 of
Jan
1,
2011.



1.2

Scope


The
 scope
 of
 the
 Configuration
 control
 board
 process
 described
 in
 this
 document
 is
 limited
 to
 data
 flow
 applications.

Note
that
pipelines
are
outside
the
scope
of
the
above‐
mentioned
memo,
and
consequently
of
 this
document.




2.

CHARTER


2.1

Classification
of
Changes


Changes
 to
 DFS
 projects
 (scope
 and
 bug
 fixes)
 shall
 be
 classified
 on
 the
 basis
 of
 their
 extra
 FTEs
 costs,
 including
also
indirect
costs

to
other
projects.
Change
of
deadlines
are
considered
major
changes.
 Minor

 
 effort
<
0.2
FTEs
 Medium

 effort
in
the
range
0.2
…
0.6
FTE
 Major

 
 effort
>
0.6
FTE
or
change
of
deadline


2.2

Board
Responsibilities


The
DFS
Configuration
Control
Board
is
responsible
for:
 •
Raising
the
attention
of
the
DMO
Head
and
the
DOO,
DOS
and
DOE
Directors
for
decision
whenever
major
 changes
have
been
requested
via
the
DFS
PR
system.


•
Taking
a
decision
about
medium
changes.
 The
board
shall
not
be
involved
in:


•
Minor
changes.
They
are
handled
as
now
directly
between
requester
and
project
manager.
 •
Budget
changes


The
Chair
decides
about
meeting
agenda
and
schedule.
The
board
shall
meet
regularly
at
least
once
every
 three
months.
Additional
meetings
might
have
to
be
called
for
whenever
urgent
change
requests
have
been





issued.
 For
 non‐urgent
 matters,
 the
 chair
 may
 decide
 to
 wait
 and
 discuss
 a
 bunch
 of
 issues
 in
 one
 single
 meeting.
For
urgent
matters,
a
dedicated
meeting
might
instead
be
the
most
appropriate
or
the
only
viable
 solution.

 The
conclusions
of
the
board
shall
be
registered
in
the
worklog
of
the
main
ticket
associated
to
the
project
 (see
below)
and
shall
be
communicated
in
terms
of
meeting
minutes
that
document
the
accepted,
rejected
 and
postponed
change
requests.


2.3

Board
Members
and
their
Responsibilities


The
Chair
of
the
DFS
CCB
is
selected
by
the
DOO,
DOS
and
DOE
Directors
in
consultation
with
the
DMO,
LPO,
 SDD
Heads.
The
DMO,
LPO,
SDD
and
OPO
representatives
are
selected
by
the
respective
Division
Heads.
 
 The
board
is
composed
of
the
following
members
with
the
listed
responsibilities
and
rights

 Chair


 • Call
for
and
coordinate
DFS
CCB
meetings
at
least
every
three
months
or
whenever
necessary
 • Extract
relevant
information
(tickets)
from
the
DFS
PRS
and
distribute
to
Board
Members


 •Collect
comments
on
change
requests
from
the
CCB
board
members
and
other
experts
 • Escalate
non‐resolvable
priority
conflicts
regarding
medium
change
requests
to
directors


• May
postpone
medium
change
requests
lacking
enough
detail
for
effort
estimation
to
next
meeting
 • Register
in
the
ticket(s)
worklog
the
conclusions
of
the
board
(medium
changes)
or
Division


Heads/Directors
(major
changes)


• Communicate
board
decisions
in
terms
of
meeting
minutes
 •Monitor
regularly
the
status
of
tickets
related
to
project
scope
and
schedule
(while
the
primary
 responsibility
to
notify
the
Chair
that
there
are
issues
to
be
discussed
remains
with
the
project
 managers,
see
below)
 • Provide
updated
information
(e.g.
list
of
subsystems/components
and
SPR
responsible)
to
the
DFS
 PRS
administrator


•A
mailing
list
(dfsccb@eso.org)
shall
be
created
and
maintained
by
the
chair.
The
mailing
list
contains
 by
default
all
CCB
members


DMO
/
LPO
/
OPO
Representatives


• Contribute
to
overall
prioritization
of
pending
change
requests
by
compromising
on
own
change
 requests



• Provide
written
comments
on
medium
and
major
change
requests
prior
to
the
CCB
meetings


• May
request
escalation
to
Division
Heads/Directors
if
no
overall
prioritization
of
change
requests
can
 be
achieved
 SDD
Representative
 • Make
sure
that
pending
change
requests
to
be
discussed
at
the
next
board
meeting
have
an
effort
 and
impact
estimation
assigned
by
the
respective
project
manager.
The
effort
and
impact
estimate
 shall
consider
all
parties
involved
in
the
project.



 • On
the
basis
of
the
resources
and
the
skills
required
vs.
available,
the
impact
estimation
(see
above)
 as
well
as
the
status
of
running
projects,
prepare
scenarios
describing
which
change
requests
could
 be
implemented
and
which
one
not
including
potential
delays
to
existing
projects.

 •May
reject
change
requests
lacking
enough
detail
for
effort
estimation
(prior
to
the
CCB
meeting)
 • Inform
project
managers
about
board
decisions


If
 considered
 necessary
 by
 any
 member
 of
 the
 board,
 additional
 participants
 may
 be
 invited
 to
 provide
 written
comments
prior
to
the
CCB
meetings,
such
as
project
scientists
or
project
managers/developers
to
 provide
 expert
 advice
 to
 the
 discussions.
 However,
 these
 are
 not
 part
 of
 the
 board
 and
 have
 no
 decision
 authority.


2.4

Other
Project
Stakeholders
and
their
Responsibilities



The
following
project
stakeholders
are
not
members
of
the
CCB
board
and
usually
do
not
participate
in
the
 board
meeting.
Still,
they
have
important
responsibilities
in
implementing
the
CCB
workflow
as
follows
 Project
Scientist
in
DMO,
OPO,
LPO
 • Open
change
requests
to
project
 • Make
sure
that
the
change
request
is
sufficiently
specified
in
terms
of
use
cases
or
other
 requirements
such
that
it
is
clearly
understandable,
testable
and
its
implementation
and
test
 efforts
can
be
estimated
 • Carry
out
final
acceptance
of
implemented
change
request
 • May
nominate
an
expert
to
be
invited
for
comments
on
a
pending
change
request
 Project
Manager


•
Make
sure
that
developers
do
not
implement
any
change
request,
except
for
minor
ones,
unless
 covered
and
justified
by
a
ticket
(as
required
by
memo)
 • 
Make
sure
that
an
overall
project
ticket
exists
–
and
if
not
open
a
new
one
–
summarizing
purpose
 and
scope
of
the
project,
roles
and
responsibilities,
deadlines,
priority
with
respect
to
other
 projects
if
established



 • Provide
effort
estimates
for
change
requests
(implementation
and
testing,
including
the
possible
 setup
or
upgrade
of
a
testing
environment
and
creation
or
changes
of
databases),
specifically
 register
in
the
ticket
worklog
any
change
to
any
of
the
elements
indicated
in
the
previous
point,
 mentioning
also
extra
FTE
costs
and/or
delays
to
the
project.
When
applicable,
the
estimate
should
 include
hardware
and
licensing
procurement
costs,
as
well
as
the
possibility
of
extension
of
scope
 of
service
contracts
 • May
reject
change
requests
lacking
enough
detail
for
effort
estimation
(prior
to
the
CCB
meeting)
 • Make
sure
that
dfsccb@eso.org
receives
notifications
to
any
changes
to
such
ticket



(e.g.
adding
address
to
ticket’s
CC
list)


• Inform
the
chair
and
SDD
representative
whenever
there
are
new
issues
to
be
discussed
at
a
DFS
 CCB


• Inform
developers
about
board
decisions
affecting
their
projects



 Developers
and
Testers
 • 
Report
to
the
project
manager
about
any
request
they
receive,
via
ticket;


 • Implements
the
tickets
according
to
the
priorities
set
by
the
project
manager
 •Make
sure
that
an
overall
project
ticket
exists
–
and
if
not
open
a
new
one
–
summarizing
purpose
 and
scope
of
the
project,
roles
and
responsibilities,
deadlines,
priority
with
respect
to
other
 projects
if
established





3.

WORKFLOW


3.1

Submit
Change
Request
[Project
Scientist]


The
project
scientist
submits
a
change
request
to

the
DFS
PRS
system
or
the
OTS
PRS
system.
The
project
 scientist
has
to
make
sure
that
the
change
request
is
sufficiently
detailed
in
terms
of
use
cases
and
other
 requirements
such
that
it
allows
effort
estimation
and
the
requested
use
cases/requirements
can
be
tested
 by
 SED.
 Accompanying
 documentation
 can
 be
 attached
 to
 the
 ticket
 or
 provided
 directly
 to
 the
 project
 manager.


3.2

Estimate
Effort
/
Impact
[Project
Manager]


The
project
manager,
together
with
the
developers
and
testers,
estimates
the
effort
to
implement
and
test
 the
change
request.
Finally
s/he
updates
the
project’s
overall
ticket
to
inform
all
CCB
members
and
other
 interested
stakeholders
about
the
effort
estimation
and
potential
impact
on
/
conflicts
with
other
projects
 and
change
requests.
The
change
request
is
classified
as
minor,
medium
or
major.
The
project
manager
may
 reject
change
requests
lacking
enough
detail
for
effort
estimation.




3.3

Minor,
Medium,
Major
Change
Request
[Chair,
Project
Manager]


Minor
change
requests
are
dealt
with
directly
by
the
project
manager.
Medium
change
requests
are
dealt
 with
by
the
CCB.
Major
change
requests
are
escalated
to
the
Division
Heads/Directors
after
comments
of
the
 board
members
and
nominated
experts
have
been
collected
by
the
Chair
and
discussed
by
the
CCB.


3.4

Prepare


Implementation
proposal
of


Medium
Change
Requests
[SDD
Rep.]


Upon
request
of
the
CCB
Chair
who
plans
to
organize
a
CCB
meeting,
on
the
basis
of
the
resources
and
the
 skills
 required
 vs.
 available,
 the
 impact
 estimation
 (see
 above)
 as
 well
 as
 the
 status
 of
 running
 projects,
 prepare
 scenarios
 describing
 which
 change
 requests
 could
 be
 implemented
 and
 which
 one
 not
 including
 potential
delays
to
existing
projects.
.


3.5

Schedule
CCB
Meeting
[Chair]


CCB
meetings
are
scheduled
either
once
every
three
months
or
when
the
CCB
Chair
decides
that
the
number
 of
pending
medium
and
major
change
requests
necessitates
a
special
meeting.
The
CCB
Chair
arranges
the
 meeting
with
all
board
members
and
provides
an
agenda
with
the
medium
and
major
change
requests
to
be
 discussed,
their
estimated
effort/impact
and
the
proposal
prepared
by
the
SDD
representative.


3.6

Comment
on
Medium
&
Major
Change
Requests


The
 Chair
 invites
 the
 representatives
 of
 DMO,
 OPO,
 LPO
 and
 SDD
 and
 ‐
 optionally
 ‐
 additional
 nominated
 experts
to
comment
on
the
change
requests
listed
on
the
distributed
agenda
prior
to
the
CCB
meeting.





3.7

CCB
Meeting
‐
Accept/Reject
Medium
Change
Requests
[CCB
Board]


The
 CCB
 board
 members
 ‐
 specifically
 the
 representatives
 of
 DMO,
 OPO,
 LPO
 and
 SDD
 ‐
 review
 and
 accept/reject
the
pending
medium
change
requests,
taking
into
account
impact
on
other
change
requests
 and
ongoing
new
development
projects.
The
outcome
of
the
meeting
shall
be
a
prioritized
list
of
accepted


medium
change
requests,
a
list
of
rejected
medium
change
requests.
In
case
of
non‐resolvable
conflicts,
the
 chair
shall
escalate
also
medium
change
requests
to
the
Division
Heads/Directors.



3.8

CCB
Meeting:
Recommendation
on
Major
Change
Requests
[CCB
Board]


The
 Chair
 collects
 comments
 of
 the
 board
 members
 on
 pending
major
 change
 requests
 including
 their
 recommendations
 whether
 the
 change
 should
 be
 implemented
 or
 not.
 If
 possible,
 a
 consolidated
 recommendation
should
be
produced.






 Figure
1:
DFS
Change
Request
Workflow