[Fiware-security] FI-WARE Security Chapter -

[BISSON Pascal]

Dear Franz-Stefan,

Dear Franz-Stefan,

Thanks for your effort. Here are my answer also checked/confirmed by Manuel.

Hope it help you and others.

Regards,
Pascal

De : Franz-Stefan Preiss [mailto:FRP at zurich.ibm.com]
Envoyé : mardi 24 septembre 2013 17:57
À : BISSON Pascal; GIDOIN Daniel
Cc : fiware-security at lists.fi-ware.eu
Objet : Re: [Fiware-security] FI-WARE Security Chapter -

Hi Pascal, Hi All,

I made some major updates to our tracker backlog and hope that most issues are fixed.

However, there are still some open questions (which may also be interested for the other partners in the WP):

a) There is a feature that I just now (Sprint 3.1.3) started to work on, so I set it to "Under execution".
However, the feature will only be finished beginning of December, so I set it to Sprint 3.2.3 (and Release 3.2).
Does this sound reasonable? I'm afraid it will be flagged by TID because it is "Under execution" but not set to the current Sprint.

>> For Feature you don’t need to mention a Sprint. So just set the Release (here Release 3.2)


b) I assumed that when I close a ticket, I set it's Release and Sprint to the one when it was closed/finished.
>> Correct

Apparently, this assumption is wrong, because in the last backlog review under category T-C1, closed tickets that have Release and Sprint set are flagged.
Can you explain to us why?

>>  Probably due to the fact that you didn’t comply to the following rules:

·         Feature only need Release

·         Stories & WorkItems need both Release and Sprint

·         As for EPIC so don’t need any of those.

c) In the review under category T-C3, epics that have no "sons" are flagged.
I fixed this issue by renaming all our tickets such that "sons" partially contain the name of the "father" as prefix. For example,
FIWARE.Feature.Security.Privacy.Authentication.CredentialIssuance is the son of
FIWARE.Epic.Security.Privacy.Authentication.
Is this the correct way of defining father-son relations?

>>> YES

There is no corresponding field in the tracker tickets, and I don't know how else one can define such relationships.

d) Epics and Features have to be documented on the Wiki.
Category T-C5 of the review flags Epics and Features that have both the field "Wiki URL" and "Detailed Description" set and suggests to remove the description.

>>> Don’t care too much for TC-5 issues. Manuel is working on getting them addressed automatically. The objective being not to duplicate things.

But the Detailed Description is a mandatory field in the tracker, so it cannot be removed and thus it's unclear to me what to do here.

>>> You are right  Detailed Description is mandatory (confirmed By Manuel). So the only thing we can do here would be to remove the content and only leave blank/white space as content.




Best Regards,
Franz-Stefan



From:        BISSON Pascal <pascal.bisson at thalesgroup.com<mailto:pascal.bisson at thalesgroup.com>>
To:        "fiware-security at lists.fi-ware.eu<mailto:fiware-security at lists.fi-ware.eu>" <fiware-security at lists.fi-ware.eu<mailto:fiware-security at lists.fi-ware.eu>>
Date:        09/19/2013 10:31 AM
Subject:        [Fiware-security] FI-WARE Security Chapter -
Sent by:        fiware-security-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu<mailto:fiware-security-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu>
________________________________



Dear All,

The last report I received from TID (Manuel) – see below - clearly shows that there was no progress this month on our Chapter which is not good at all. Even more that some good progress had been performed the month before. So we do have the capacity to improve.

So counting on each of you and first and foremost GE owners/Task leads to helps us to recover from this situation and make us progress on fixing the issues identified and reported to us.

WP8-Security< an lang=EN-GB>https://forge.fi-ware.eu/docman/view.php/27/2822/FIWARE.backlog.security.review.20130918-1832.xlsx
Progress (Tracker:75.9%->76,0%; Flat Structure 59.1%->59.1%; 72.15%->72.33%)

Please devote necessary time and attention this even more that as reminded by Manuel the backlog has a delivery scheduled by 30th October.

Thanks in advance for your cooperation and support.

Regards,

Pascal_______________________________________________
Fiware-security mailing list
Fiware-security at lists.fi-ware.eu<mailto:Fiware-security at lists.fi-ware.eu>
https://lists.fi-ware.eu/listinfo/fiware-security
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.fiware.org/private/old-fiware-security/attachments/20130925/3416967a/attachment.html>