+1 Em ter, 7 de jul de 2020 14:45, Daniel Takabayashi < daniel.takabaya...@gmail.com> escreveu:
> +1 > > Em ter., 7 de jul. de 2020 às 10:18, Lucas Cardoso Silva < > cardosolucas61....@gmail.com> escreveu: > > > Hello everyone. I would like to propose a more in-depth analysis of > > Marvin's architectural proposal and for that I need your help. The idea > > isn’t to change the proposal, but to identify architectural approaches > and > > describe scenarios around different contexts of use. This is part of my > > M.Sc. research, which is a case study of how to carry out such analysis > in > > an open source environment. The activity is also interesting for the > > Marvin-AI community, as it has the potential to generate important > insight > > regarding the proposed architecture, allowing us to identify new features > > or modify some approaches as needed. > > > > The evaluation will be carried out using a traditional evaluation method > > called ATAM, developed at the Software Engineering Institute at CMU. It > was > > originally developed to be carried out in a room with the presence of all > > stakeholders, in short sessions. Obviously, we can't do that, therefore I > > will make some adaptations, so that we can do it via email, GitHub, and > the > > other tools we have available. > > > > Q&A: > > > > What do you need from me? > > > > R: Just check your e-mail once in a while and give us your opinion and > > ideas. That's it! Each interaction in the process should only take the > > response time of a normal email (about 15 minutes). I expect to send no > > more than one or two e-mails every week. > > > > Do you really need me? > > > > Literature recommends that at least 5 stakeholders are involved in the > > process. We have 5 PMC/committers, and it would be great if everyone is > on > > board. I will take the liberty to encourage member participation, so that > > the interactions become more valuable. > > > > How long will it take? > > > > R: There is no time limit, but I expect around 6-8 weeks of effort. That > > depends on the discussions, though. > > > > How does this work? > > > > R: Long answer -> > > https://resources.sei.cmu.edu/library/asset-view.cfm?assetid=5177. > > > > R: Short answer: > > > > - > > > > First we define Marvin-AI's mission, what Marvin proposes to do and > what > > is out of bounds. This formal definition is important for future > steps, > > ensuring that only what is in scope is evaluated. > > - > > > > Next we try to identify the architectural approaches and quality > > attributes. The architectural approach is how Marvin-AI is structured. > > Quality attributes are a form of non-functional requirements that are > > supposed to be implemented at the architectural level. Marvin-AI is > > supposed to satisfy these attributes. > > - > > > > Scenario brainstorming and prioritization: here we try to describe > some > > usage scenarios (real or imaginary) that cover Marvin's main > > architectural > > approaches. We then vote to prioritize these scenario as critical / > > common > > / not important. > > > > > > - > > > > Analysis of the scenarios within the architectural proposal: we will > > make an exercise to verify how the architectural proposal performs in > > each > > scenario considered as critical or common. > > - > > > > Compilation of results: Presentation and compilation of results and > > lessons learned. > > > > > > That seems complicated. Can you explain better? > > > > R: Yes! I will try to be very careful and explain in details what > everyone > > should do, before each step in the process. > > > > Thank you very much, > > > > Lucas > > >
