+1 On Tue, 7 Jul 2020 at 9:11 PM Lucas Nildaimon <lucasnildai...@gmail.com> wrote:
> +1 > > Em ter, 7 de jul de 2020 19:10, Willian Leite <willian.le...@gmail.com> > escreveu: > > > +1 > > > > On Tue, Jul 7, 2020 at 5:05 PM Bruno Sette <brunosilvase...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > +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 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > [image: EmailLogo-2.png] > > > > Willian Leite > > > > > > > > [image: Linkedin] <https://br.linkedin.com/in/wleite> [image: Blog @ > > Medium] > > <https://medium.com/@willianleite/> [image: @willianleite] > > <http://twitter.com/willianleite>* <https://github.com/wleite>* > > >
