Date	11.5.2004 klo 12.00-14.00
Address	Helsinki, TKT:n / C476
present	Kärkkäinen Kalle Tapani (president)
	Antti Tevanlinna        (director)
	Forsgren Jukka          (secretary)
	Marquinez Alberto
	Sierla Sami Pekka
	Zhang Jianling           
absent

Start	meeting	at 12.00

Malan Project Summary
=====================

Group work and communication
----------------------------

Kalle:   - communication between group members could have been better
         - more meetings per week, maybe even four
Alberto: - group work and communication has been fine
Sami:    - There was lack of communication especially in the design phase
Jukka:   - There probably should have been more communication with customer


Waterfall project model
-----------------------

Kalle:   - Requirements document was good as was Project Plan
         - Most problems started in the Design phase
         - Testing was left to very minimum
         - Test case planning should have started before implementation
         - Implementation didn't go as planned
Antti:   - Requirements document was good
         - Design took too long and was too superficial at first


Why was the project a week 
late with bad quality
---------------------

Sami:    - System was more complex than was first thought
Kalle:   - Complexity was in different areas than was suspected,
           eg. events are badly implemented
         - People should have been online (Messenger) in the design phase

The triangle
------------

    time and resources (fixed)
   /\
  /  \
 /    \
/______\functionality
quality


Kalle:   - Design phase failed to deliver
Antti:   - Everybody had too high hopes of people, because no one
           knew each others beforehand
         - Atleast a week was wasted in design phase and then everybody
           didn't understand it fully
Sami:    - Everybody told about their knowledge honestly in the first
           meeting

Completeness and time
---------------------

completeness
^     .  . good groups
|  .
| .      . us
|.     .
|. . 
|---------> time

Antti:   - More work should have been done right in the beginning
         - Risks and problems should be identified as early as possible
           and then adjust the "triangle" accordingly


What should have been done differently
--------------------------------------

Sami:    - Hard to say about design, because of no prior experience
Jukka:   - Everybody should have been online from the first days
         - Word and RTF documents were pain in the ass in OpenOffice and
           there was no process for shared document management
         - University courses do not really prepare for more complex
           object oriented design and systems
Kalle:   - Should Interface have been left out between different components?
Antti:   - Non common tools caused problems and the synchronization of work
           as well
         - The project area was one of the hardest this spring
Jianlin: - Would have wanted to do more work, if was given better
           instructions

Other issues
------------

Kalle:   - Customer didn't use our Requirements document, but his own
           web pages instead
Jukka:   - Requirements document templates was changed to a completely
           new one when work on it had already been done

	
The meeting ends at 14.00