Project ABC-Development Case
This is an example of what a development case may look like. There is no point in restating information already in the process. What you have to describe are the deviations from the process. You may put together a Development Case that contains a small description of the process. However, the problem with that kind of document is that they tend to grow forever, until they’re the size of the process handbook!
This example is intended to give you an idea about how a development case would look for a small project, let’s say a commercial information system.
For more information about the Development Case, its contents, and outline, see Artifact: Development Case.
Topics
- Introduction
- [Revision History](#Revision History)
- Purpose
- Definitions, Acronyms and Abbreviations
- References
- [Overview of the Development
Case](#Overview of the Development Case)
- Lifecycle Model
- [Disciplines](#Overvew: Disciplines)
- [Discipline Configuration](#Overview: Configuration)
- [Artifact Classification](#Artifact Classification)
- [Review Procedures](#Review Procedures)
- [Sample Iteration Plans](#Sample Iteration Plans)
- Disciplines
- [Business Modeling](#Business Modeling)
- Requirements
- [Analysis & Design](#Analysis & Design)
- Implementation
- Test
- Deployment
- [Configuration & Change Management](#Configuration & Change Management)
- [Project Management](#Project Management)
- Environment
- Roles
Introduction
Revision History
| Date | Version | Description | Author |
|---|---|---|---|
| 01/01/2000 | 1.0 | - | Tom Smith |
Purpose
The purpose of the document is to describe the development process for the project ABC.
Definitions, Acronyms, and Abbreviations
Not applicable.
References
Not applicable.
Overview of the Development Case
Lifecycle Model
See the section titled “Project Plan” in the project’s Software Development Plan.
Disciplines
The development-case example presented here takes you through all nine disciplines: Business Modeling, Requirements, Analysis & Design, Implementation, Test, Deployment, Configuration & Change Management, Project Management, and Environment.
Discipline Configuration
The purpose of this section is to explain how the discipline configuration works. This includes the purpose of the different tables and sections that describe each workflow in the section titled “Workflows”.
Section: “Workflows”
This section details any changes made to the structure of the workflow itself. Typical changes include the addition of activities to describe company-specific ways of working or the removal of activities from the workflow.
Section: “Artifacts”
The section describes, in a table, how the artifact will be used. Additional ‘local’ artifacts can be added to the table as needed.
| Artifacts | How to use | Review Details | Tools used | Templates/ Examples | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Incep | Elab | Const | Trans | ||||
Explanation of the table
| Column Name | Purpose | Contents/Comments |
|---|---|---|
| Artifacts | To name of the artifact | A reference to the artifact in the Rational Unified Process (RUP) or to a local artifact definition that’s held as part of the development case. |
| How to use | To qualify how the artifact is used across the life cycle | For each phase, decide on: - Must haves - Should haves - Could haves - Won’t haves These are defined in the Guidelines: Classifying Artifacts. |
| Review Details | To define the review level and review procedures applied to the artifact. | Decide on the review level: - Formal-External - Formal-Internal - Informal - None For details, see Guidelines: Review Levels. Also add a reference to the definition and detail of the relevant review procedures. The reference could point to either the RUP or to the section titled “Review Procedure” in the development case. More specific review procedures are defined in the discipline’s “Additional Review Procedures” sub-section. |
| Tools used | To define the tool or tools used to produce the artifact. | References to the details of the tools used to develop and maintain the artifact. |
| Templates/Examples | To provide the templates to be used and examples of artifacts that use the templates. | References to templates and examples. This could refer to either the templates and examples in the RUP or local templates and examples. This column may also contain references to actual artifacts that provide additional help to project members. |
Section: “Notes on Artifacts”
This section has three main purposes:
- It contains a list all artifacts you Won’t use and the motives behind your decision not to use them.
- It contains a reference to the project’s Configuration Management (CM) Plan,
which describes the configuration management strategy used when working on
these artifacts. The CM Plan allows developers to answer questions such as:
- When do I release my artifact?
- Where do I put my newly created or modified artifact?
- Where do I find existing artifacts for the project?
- If the development case is an organization-level development case, this is where you add notes on what each project needs to consider when they decide what to do with the artifact. Use the predefined table below as a starting point.
| Artifacts | How to Use | Reason |
|---|---|---|
| |
Section: “Reports”
This section lists the reports to be used and additional ‘local’ reports can be added to the table as needed.
| Reports | How to use | Templates/Examples | Tools Used |
|---|---|---|---|
| |
Section: “Notes on the Reports”
This section has two main purposes. First, it lists all reports that the project has decided it Won’t use, and the motives behind its decision not to use them. Secondly, if the development case is a an organization-level use case, this is where to add notes on what each project needs to consider when they decide what to do with the report.
Section: “Additional Review Procedures”
This section captures any additional review procedures required for the artifacts used in the discipline. These supplement the general review procedures described in the “Overview” section of the Development Case.
Section: “Other Issues”
This section captures any outstanding issues with the discipline’s configuration. This section can be used as an Issues List while building the development case.
Artifact Classification
An artifact is a deliverable of the process. It is often developed within one discipline, although there are exceptions. The artifacts are organized in the discipline where it’s created. To describe how an artifact will be used, consider the following classification scheme and see Guidelines: Classifying Artifacts for details:
- Must
- Should
- Could
- Won’t
Review Procedures
The project uses the following review levels:
- Formal-External
- Formal-Internal
- Informal
- None
For details, see Guidelines: Review Levels.
Sample Iteration Plans
Inception Phase
Elaboration Phase
To be defined later in the project.
Construction Phase
To be defined later in the project.
Transition Phase
To be defined later in the project.
Disciplines
Business Modeling
Workflow
Follow the Domain Modeling workflow detail only. See Business Modeling: Overview.
Artifacts
| Artifacts | How to use | Review Details | Tools used | Templates/ Examples | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Incep | Elab | Const | Trans | ||||
| Business Entity | Must | Could | Could | Could | Formal-External | Rational Rose | |
| Business Glossary | Must | Could | Could | Could | Formal-External | Rational Rose | |
| Business Analysis Model | Must | Could | Could | Could | Formal-External | Rational Rose | |
| Target-Organization Assessment | Must | Could | Could | Could | Formal-External | Rational Rose |
Notes on the Artifacts
See the project’s Configuration Management Plan for information on how the artifacts are configuration-managed.
The project decided to only perform domain modeling, which means that the following artifacts will not be developed: Business Actor, Business Architecture Document, Business Rules, Business Use Case, Business Use-Case Model, Business Vision, Business Worker, Business System, and Supplementary Business Specification.
Reports
| Reports | How to use | Templates/Examples | Tools Used |
|---|---|---|---|
| Business Entity | Could | Microsoft Word | |
| Business Analysis Model Survey | Could | Rational SoDA Microsoft Word |
Requirements
Workflow
No changes. For details see the Requirements Overview.
Artifacts
Notes on the Artifacts
See the project’s Configuration Management Plan for information about how the artifacts are configuration-managed.
Reports
| Reports | How to Use | Templates/Examples | Tools Used |
|---|---|---|---|
| Actor | Could | ||
| Use-Case | Could | ||
| Use-Case Model Survey | Could | ||
| Use-Case Storyboard | Could |
Analysis & Design
Workflow
A real-time application is not being developed, therefore the Capsule Designer role and the activity Capsule Design are excluded. For details on the workflow, see the Analysis & Design Overview.
Artifacts
| Artifacts | How to use | Review Details | Tools used | Templates/ Examples | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Incep | Elab | Const | Trans | ||||
| Data Model | Won’t | Could | Could | Could | Informal | Rational Rose | |
| Deployment Model | Could | Must | Must | Must | Formal- Internal | Rational Rose | |
| Design Class | Could | Must | Must | Must | Informal | Rational Rose | |
| Design Model | Could | Must | Must | Must | Formal- Internal | Rational Rose | |
| Design Package | Could | Must | Must | Must | Formal- Internal | Rational Rose | |
| Design Subsystem | Could | Must | Must | Must | Formal- Internal | Rational Rose | |
| Interface | Could | Must | Must | Must | Formal- Internal | Rational Rose | |
| Reference Architecture | Could | Must | Must | Must | Formal- Internal | Rational Rose | |
| Software Architecture Document (SAD) | Could | Must | Must | Must | Formal- External | Rational SoDA Microsoft Word | |
| Use-Case Realization | Could | Must | Must | Must | Informal | Rational Rose |
Notes on the Artifacts
The project is not developing a real-time product, which means that the following artifacts will not developed: Capsule, Event, Protocol, and Signal.
The project decided not to keep an analysis model, which means that the following artifacts will not be developed: Analysis Class and Analysis Model.
Reports
| Reports | How to Use | Templates/Examples | Tools Used |
|---|---|---|---|
| Class | Could | Rational SoDA Microsoft Word | |
| Design-Model Survey | Could | Rational SoDA Microsoft Word | |
| Design Package/Subsystem | Could | Rational SoDA Microsoft Word | |
| Use-Case Realization | Could | Rational SoDA Microsoft Word |
Implementation
Workflow
No changes in the workflow. For details see the Implementation Overview.
Artifacts
| Artifacts | How to use | Review Details | Tools used | Templates/ Examples | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Incep | Elab | Const | Trans | ||||
| Build | Could | Must | Must | Must | Informal | Microsoft® Visual Basic® | |
| Implementation Element | Could | Must | Must | Must | Informal Code reviews | Microsoft Visual Basic | |
| Implementation Model | Could | Must | Must | Must | Informal | Microsoft Visual Basic | |
| Implementation Subsystem | Could | Must | Must | Must | Formal- Internal | Microsoft Visual Basic | |
| Integration Build Plan | Could | Must | Must | Must | Formal- Internal | Microsoft Word |
Additional Review Procedures
Informal code reviews are performed.
Test
Workflow
No formal performance test is done, otherwise the workflow is followed unchanged. For details on the process, see the Test: Overview.
Artifacts
| Artifacts | How to use | Review Details | Tools used | Templates/ Examples | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Incep | Elab | Const | Trans | ||||
| Test Plan | Could | Could | Must | Must | Informal | Microsoft Word | |
| Test-Ideas List | Won’t | Could | Must | Must | Informal | Microsoft Word | |
| Test Case | Won’t | Could | Must | Must | Informal | Microsoft Word | |
| Test Data | Won’t | Could | Must | Must | Informal | Rational Rose | |
| Workload Model | Won’t | Could | Must | Must | Informal | Rational Rose | |
| Test Class | Won’t | Could | Must | Must | Informal | Rational Rose | |
| Test Components | Won’t | Could | Must | Must | Informal | Microsoft Visual Basic | |
| Test Results | Won’t | Could | Must | Must | Informal | Microsoft Word | |
| Test Evaluation Summary | Won’t | Could | Must | Must | Informal | Microsoft Word | |
| Test Suite | Won’t | Could | Must | Must | Informal | Rational Rose | |
| Test Script | Won’t | Could | Must | Must | Informal | Rational TestStudio | |
| Test Environment Configuration | Won’t | Could | Must | Must | Informal | Rational Rose | |
| Test Automation Architecture | Won’t | Could | Must | Must | Informal | Rational Rose | |
| Test Interface Specification | Won’t | Could | Must | Must | Informal | Rational Rose |
Notes on the Artifacts
No Workload Analysis Document is developed.
Additional Review Procedures
- Test cases-informally approved by the system testers.
- The system testers decide if the test criteria for an iteration is fulfilled.
- The customer approves the final iteration.
Deployment
Workflow
A previously existing deployment workflow was adapted to use the artifacts suggested in the RUP. An exception is the Course Material artifact, which is excluded because no formal training is produced for our product.
Artifacts
| Artifacts | How to use | Review Details | Tools used | Templates/ Examples | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Incep | Elab | Const | Trans | ||||
| Bill of Materials | Won’t | Won’t | Could | Must | Formal- Internal | Microsoft Word | |
| Deployment Plan | Won’t | Could | Must | Must | Informal | Microsoft Word | |
| Deployment Unit | Won’t | Could | Could | Must | Informal | Microsoft Word | |
| Support Material | Won’t | Could | Could | Must | Informal | Microsoft Word | |
| Installation Artifacts | Won’t | Could | Could | Must | Informal | Microsoft Word | |
| Product | Won’t | Could | Could | Must | Formal- External | ||
| Product Artwork | Won’t | Could | Could | Must | Informal | Microsoft Word | |
| Release Notes | Won’t | Could | Could | Must | Formal- Internal | Microsoft Word |
Notes on the Artifacts
No Training Materials are developed because the product does not require formal training.
Reports
| Reports | How to Use | Templates/Examples | Tools Used |
|---|---|---|---|
| |
Configuration & Change Management
Workflow
No changes in the workflow. For details on the process, see the Configuration & Change Management: Overview.
Artifacts
| Artifacts | How to use | Review Details | Tools used | Templates/ Examples | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Incep | Elab | Const | Trans | ||||
| Change Request | Won’t | Could | Must | Must | Informal | Rational ClearQuest | |
| Configuration Audit Findings | Won’t | Could | Must | Must | Informal | Microsoft Word | |
| Configuration Management Plan | Won’t | Must | Must | Must | Informal | Microsoft Word | |
| Project Repository | Won’t | Could | Must | Must | None | Rational ClearCase | |
| Workspace | Won’t | Could | Must | Must | None | Rational ClearCase |
Project Management
Workflow
No changes to the workflow. For details, see Project Management: Overview.
Artifacts
| Artifacts | How to use | Review Details | Tools used | Templates/ Examples | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Incep | Elab | Const | Trans | ||||
| Business Case | Must | Must | Could | Could | Formal- External | Microsoft® Word® | |
| Iteration Assessment | Must | Must | Must | Must | Informal | Microsoft Word | |
| Iteration Plan | Could | Must | Must | Must | Informal | Microsoft Word | |
| Measurement Plan | Could | Could | Could | Could | Informal | Microsoft Word | |
| Problem Resolution Plan | Must | Must | Must | Must | Informal | Microsoft Word | |
| Product Acceptance Plan | Could | Must | Must | Must | Informal | Microsoft Word | |
| Project Measurements | Could | Could | Must | Must | Informal | Microsoft Word | |
| Quality Assurance Plan | Could | Could | Could | Could | Informal | Microsoft Word | |
| Review Record | Must | Must | Must | Must | Informal | Microsoft Word | |
| Risk List | Must | Must | Must | Must | Formal- Internal | Microsoft Word | |
| Risk Management Plan | Could | Must | Must | Must | Informal | Microsoft Word | |
| Software Development Plan (SDP) | Won’t | Could | Must | Must | Formal- Internal | Microsoft Word Microsoft Project | |
| Status Assessment | Could | Must | Must | Must | Informal | Microsoft Word |
Notes on the Artifacts
The artifact Work Order won’t be used.
Environment
Workflow
No changes in the workflow. For details on the process, see the Environment: Overview.
Artifacts
| Artifacts | How to use | Review Details | Tools used | Templates/ Examples | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Incep | Elab | Const | Trans | ||||
| Business Modeling Guidelines | Must | Could | Could | Could | Informal | Microsoft Word | |
| Design Guidelines | Won’t | Must | Must | Must | Informal | Microsoft Word | |
| Development Case | Must | Must | Must | Must | Informal | Microsoft® FrontPage® | |
| Development Infrastructure | Must | Must | Must | Must | Informal | Microsoft Word | |
| Development-Organization Assessment | Must | Won’t | Won’t | Won’t | Informal | Microsoft Word | |
| Manual Styleguide | Won’t | Could | Must | Must | Informal | Microsoft Word | |
| Project-Specific Templates | Must | Must | Must | Must | Informal | Microsoft Word | |
| Programming Guidelines | Won’t | Must | Must | Must | Informal | Microsoft Word | |
| Test Guidelines | Won’t | Must | Must | Must | Informal | Microsoft Word | |
| Tools | Must | Must | Must | Must | Informal | Microsoft Word to document | |
| Tool Guidelines | Won’t | Could | Must | Must | Informal | Microsoft Word | |
| Use-Case Modeling Guidelines | Must | Must | Must | Must | Informal | Microsoft Word | |
| User-Interface Guidelines | Won’t | Must | Must | Must | Informal | Microsoft Word |
Roles
Not applicable.