Downloaded 354 times
Uploaded byMichael Deady
Automate the sdlc process
The document discusses the automation of the software development lifecycle (SDLC) through the HP Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) platform, highlighting the need for efficiency, quality, and the integration of various processes. It emphasizes a phased approach to implementing an automated SDLC, improving predictability and quality while allowing customization according to clients' needs. Key features include real-time reporting, release management, and collaboration between development and business teams.
More Related Content
![Requirements engineering with UML [Software Design] [Computer Science] [Vrije...](https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/02requirements-180213083117-thumbnail.jpg?width=640&height=640&fit=bounds)
Similar to Automate the sdlc process
![Coded Agents – with UiPath SDK + LangGraph [Virtual Hands-on Workshop]](https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/codedagentsdeck-251215155422-5497c599-thumbnail.jpg?width=640&height=640&fit=bounds)
Automate the sdlc process
- 1. SDLC Automation Solution ALIplatform for Center of Excellent The AlI-CoE Project Michael Deady/ Friday, May 10, 2013 © Copyright 2013 Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P. The information contained herein is subject to change without notice.
- 2. The efficiency andquality of IT is every companies business • Diversity of Operating System and • Distributed Development Teams Platforms • Thinning lines between business and IT • Faster innovation cycles • Supporting multiple methodologies • Increased mobility and accessibility • Parallel initiatives • Socially-connected consumers • Etc. • Speed to market • Escalating risk exposure • Composite application design • Adoption of lean and efficient development strategies and processes Tearing down the walls of an antiquated and archaic process and replace it with automation and integration 2 © Copyright 2012 Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P. The information contained herein is subject to change without notice.
- 3. Henry Ford revolutionizedthe auto industry now, HP is revolutionizing the Software Development process. “Henry Ford developed the modernday, assembly-line over 100 years ago, it was the catalyst for what we now know as our global economy. “ • The key to this revolutionary idea was its simplicity. • Ford didn't address the fabrication of the car, he addressed the process in which the car was manufactured. 3 © Copyright 2012 Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P. The information contained herein is subject to change without notice.
- 4. Keys to enableVelocity Eliminating the sources of latency in a mobile, agile, composite IT landscape Virtualization Visibility and Collaboration • • • Drive real-time decisions Optimize work streams Immediate response to change • • • Build an always-on lab Provide constant access Represent external factors Automation • • • Lightning fast execution Automated regression Configuration as code Streamline the supply chain of applications, Ford style! 4 © Copyright 2012 Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P. The information contained herein is subject to change without notice.
- 5. The simplicity ofthe answer sometimes gets lost in the complexity of the question The Question: The answer is: 5 © Copyright 2012 Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P. The information contained herein is subject to change without notice.
- 6. HP’s PS visionfor SDLC ALM Best practices Documents •Project templates •Processes •Intellectual property 6 Developing a complete CoE package •Code •Training •Expertise •Continuity across projects Module Packages •Customized for Each Client •A-line with the SDLC processes •Integration with third-party products •Interlinking design which complements each module © Copyright 2012 Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P. The information contained herein is subject to change without notice. Application Development Maturity Assessment Tools • ITIL • ART
- 7. So how dowe deliver in a SDLC process? Innovation—that’s fast and works… Requirements Develop Test Yesterday • Exhaustive definition • Abstract • Contractual 4 months • Manual configurations & stubs • Driven top-down • PC-based applications • Test only; code=black box • Lead time for environments • Treated as ‘last mile’ 7 • Manual deployment • Wastage of assets: performance scripts, known bugs, etc. 1 week Today/tomorrow • Just enough • Experiential • Story-based / interpretive Deploy • Composite & virtualized • Automatic connections • Multi-channel apps • Insight into code changes • Auto deploys for dev/test • Continual testing © Copyright 2012 Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P. The information contained herein is subject to change without notice. • Automated deployment • Asset reuse between Apps & Ops
- 8. Automated SDLC Process •ReleaseModule •Planning •Baseline Library •Project KPI •Risk Management •Change Management •Defect Management •Task Management •Test Planning •Test Execution •Automation •Testing Stages •Risk Reporting •Environment Staging 8 Release Management & Process Design Management & Process Test Management & Process Build Management & Process © Copyright 2012 Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P. The information contained herein is subject to change without notice. • Model Management •Project Documents •Definitions •Business Rule •Risk analyst •Requirements Documentation •Design Documentation •Link Req. to Code •Requirement Development • Dev. Strategies •Code Management •*Data Management •Tool Introgreation
- 9. Vision Centralized management &reporting in all phases SDLC Real-time visibility into the application delivery process Unify management processes across the SDLC Reduce duplication of effort between groups & projects Provide an aggregated, cross-application project view of quality, and progress Facilitate collaboration and communication between the business, development, QA, and operations teams Phase and modular approach to implementing automated SDLC process 9 © Copyright 2012 Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P. The information contained herein is subject to change without notice.
- 10. Aligning delivery byteams 10 © Copyright 2012 Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P. The information contained herein is subject to change without notice.
- 11. Defining your SLDCprocess today? Focus on Software Development efficiencies Focus on quality, value and governance Center of excellence Product and process standardization Silo-ed SDLC Process Level 0 Ad-hoc •No documented SDLC processes •No architectural governance processes •Adoption is project-focused •Testing is ad-hoc Level 1 Initializing Level 2 Standardized • Project-based processes/tools •SDLC may be structured, but mostly manual • Siloed SDLC teams and tools • Lack of organizational metrics and •Centralize/consolidat e technology, licenses, admin & support •Standardized use of tools, templates, naming conventions, asset sharing, some automation •Best practices for tools usage •Some level of organization metrics baselines 11 Shared Service • Consolidated SDLC Product Utility Project Based Level 3 Managed Level 4 Optimized Increasing Maturity © Copyright 2012 Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P. The information contained herein is subject to change without notice. Service Utility • Standardized organizational processes and practices •Service bureau for providing consulting/support •Org SDLC audits, metrics, governance, riskbased quality •Process automation across SDLC personnel providing services to LOBs •Well-defined governance and service levels; chargeback models •High levels of automation, re-use and efficiency in execution •Organizational capability metrics and real-time dashboards •SDLC integration
- 12. SDLC center ofexcellent (ITIL) Application Lifecycle Management Release Management Development (Build) Management Test Management Test Execution Test Strategy Data Manager © Copyright 2012 Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P. The information contained herein is subject to change without notice. Task Management Code Integration Risk Analysis Requirements Management Issue Management Change Management Application Management 12 Design Management
- 13. Release management © Copyright2012 Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P. The information contained herein is subject to change without notice.
- 14. Release management Application LifecycleManagement Application Management Issue Management Defect Analysis KPI Development Defect workflow © Copyright 2012 Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P. The information contained herein is subject to change without notice. Risk Analysis Priority Analysis Time Analysis Cross project Sharing Release Process Project Integration Methodology Driven Templates 14 Change Management
- 15. Design management © Copyright2012 Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P. The information contained herein is subject to change without notice.
- 16. Design Management Time Management •Real-TimeROI Analysis (Custom KPI’s) Quality Management •Immediate Progress Reporting 16 © Copyright 2012 Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P. The information contained herein is subject to change without notice.
- 17. Build management © Copyright2012 Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P. The information contained herein is subject to change without notice.
- 18. Build management usingCI process 50+ additional integrations available Data Test Management (DTM) © Copyright 2012 Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P. The information contained herein is subject to change without notice. External API’s JIRA, Rally, VersionOne Data Manager Related Requirements Business Priority IntelliJ Visual Studio Eclipse 18 Task Management Application Impact Integrated Development Environment (IDE) still growing
- 19. Continuous Integration Components Commit Application Lifecycle Management Test Build 19 Plan Code ©Copyright 2012 Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P. The information contained herein is subject to change without notice. Spec
- 20. Tying it alltogether: the HP ALM Platform IDE StaticC ode Analysis IntelliJ Coverity Visual Studio SC M CVS Eclipse Subversion Build Microsoft TFS Hudson HP ALM Jenkins AccuRev Perforce Electric Cloud Git Cloud Bees Unit Test Junit C ode C overage NCover TestNG 20 Nunit © Copyright 2012 Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P. The information contained herein is subject to change without notice. Cobertura
- 21. Test Management © Copyright2012 Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P. The information contained herein is subject to change without notice.
- 22. Test management 22 © Copyright2012 Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P. The information contained herein is subject to change without notice.
- 23. Test Process Governance Req.Coverage Progress Report Quality Report Dashboard Automation Logs VIEW & MANAGE HP ALM IMPLEMENT & EXECUTE 23 Requirement Definition © Copyright 2012 Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P. The design contained herein is subject to change without notice. Test information Automation implementation Defect tracking Execution
- 24. Tool Integration HP’s ApplicationLifecycle Management Release Management Sprinter Business process testing (BPT) Fortify, Jenkins Service Test, ITKO Lisa Performance Center, LoadRunner UFT, QTP, Mobile Data Management Tool *60+ other additional integrations available Visual Studio, Eclipses , Etc… MS Word and Excel Most Modeling tool on the Market PPM © Copyright 2012 Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P. The information contained herein is subject to change without notice. 24 Test Management Build Management (External Application Integration) Design Management
- 25. PS Phase Delivery– SDLC Process Alignment Delivery Management Release Module Information Management Issue Management Requirements Design Design Module ALM Application Modeling Code & Task Management Build Module Project Planning & Tracking PPM Data Sharing KPI Root cause analysts Business Need & Validation Risk & Design Analysts Design Tools Development Tools Single Point IDE Application integrity Link Code to Requirements Planning Functional and Non-functional Test Module Execution 25 © Copyright 2012 Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P. The information contained herein is subject to change without notice. Manual Automated
- 26. Pause for Q&A or Next Samples © Copyright 2012 Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P. The information contained herein is subject to change without notice.
- 27. Artifact Samples © Copyright2012 Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P. The information contained herein is subject to change without notice.
- 28. Cross Project Integration& Continuous integration 28 © Copyright 2012 Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P. The information contained herein is subject to change without notice.
- 29. Samples of DefectModule Key STATUS DISPOSITION REPORTED AS OPEN NOT REPORTED DECISION PENDING REVIEW NEW DOCUMENTATION FOR WORKAROUNDS Clarification IS DEFECT VALID REJECTED No YES PENDING ASSIGNMENT USER ERROR No OPEN TEMPORARY WORKAROUND DUPLICATE RESEARCHING EXTERNAL ISSUE NOT REPORTED FUTURE ENHANCEMENT READY FOR RETEST ACCEPT DEFECT? YES A DEFECT/ ENHANCEMENT CAN ENTER DEFERRED STATUS FROM ANY POINT ALONG THE LIFECYCLE INVALID REQUIREMENTS UNIT TEST COMPLETE DEFERRED WAITING FOR VENDOR INVALID TEST SENT TO VENDOR ASSIGNED CAN’T FIX WORKING FIXED HP Best Practices Defect Process Flow by ALM Role READY FOR RETEST REPORTED AS CLOSED Action ALM_Tester ALM_TestLead Disposition Decision Automated Email ALM_TeamLead Manual Email ALM_Contributor Pending Review YES New CLOSED NO PENDING ASSIGNMENT RETESTED SUCCESSFULLY REOPEN PERMANENT WORKAROUND Customer Impact Operations Impact Fixed Technical Impact Assigned Open DEFECT RETEST SUCCESSFULLY? Unsuccessful Test Enter/Modify Defect (assign to TestLead) No Yes Valid defect? Future Enhancement? No Include the following in the resolution: Description of the resolution Root cause of the problem Amount of time required for resolution Tips for monitoring this problem in the future Yes Yes Select Rejected Select Deferred Include the following in the description: Summary of the problem Detailed description of the problem Steps to reproduce the problem and/or reference to the corresponding test case in HP Quality Center Date and time when the problem occurred Pending Assignment Select Assigned To Retest successful ? Yes Reopen Closed Deferred Yes Select Assigned To Researching Send to Vendor Working Fix defect Select Close Retested Successfully Permanent Workaround 1-Critical End 2-High Pending Assignment Select Assigned To Automated Email On Change Of: Assigned To Severity Status 3-Medium 4-Low User Error A reject reason must be entered. Duplicate External Issue End Invalid Requirements Invalid Test Can’t Fix Temporary Workaround 29 No Accept Defect? Ready for Retest in QA No Rejected Need Clarification ? No Any Quality Center role can enter defects A deferred reason must be entered. © Copyright 2012 Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P. The information contained herein is subject to change without notice. Future Enhancement End Severity Level A condition is present that causes the system to fail completely or causes data to be lost. A key feature needed is not available or working. There is no workaround. The defect causes the system to produce incorrect, incomplete or inconsistent results, or impairs the system’s usability, but the system is still functional. There is no workaround. Same as a 2-High, however a partial to complete workaround is available. (Minor) Software is usable, but a cosmetic problem such as a spelling or typographic error exists. Priority Level 1-Very High Very High customer impact. There are no acceptable workarounds. The problem requires immediate attention. 2-High High to Medium customer impact. Workaround is available. Impairs the system’s usability or results in incorrect output. 3-Medium Some customer impact. Workaround designed, but not in place. 4-Low Little or no customer impact. Work around easily implemented.
- 30. Sample Requirement Module 30 ©Copyright 2012 Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P. The information contained herein is subject to change without notice.
- 31. Adaption readiness tool 31 ©Copyright 2012 Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P. The information contained herein is subject to change without notice.
- 32. Sample Role Management ALMRoles Tools Engineer Project Administrator ALM_Admin IT Test Lead ALM_TestLead Test Executer (System, Functional) Test Designer, Test Analyst ALM_Tester Responsible for developing and executing test cases Logs defects in HP Application Lifecycle Management during test execution Validates defect fixes during test execution Any role responsible for assigning work to their group ALM_TeamLead IT Development Project Team Members ALM_Contributor Assigns work to the developer, Business Analyst, etc., for all valid defects which impact their groups Provide guidance and assistance to the development team in resolving defects Responsible for researching and resolving defects that have been assigned Leadership (Director or above) 32 Assigned to HP Application Lifecycle Management Group SiteAdmin ALM_Reporter Responsibilities of Role Responsible for the general management of the HP Application Lifecycle Management application and backup/support for the project administrator Responsible for the management of users, reporting, and customization at the project level Responsible for the success of the overall test effort Manages the defect process from a test perspective Decides if a defect is valid and changes the status to Open if it is valid Provides guidance and assistance to the test team to ensure resolution is achieved for all necessary defects Able to generate reports for the main purpose of escalating to Senior Leadership © Copyright 2012 Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P. The information contained herein is subject to change without notice.
- 33. Deliverables and Outcomes ALMPortfolio SDLC Solution Our Approach • We help our clients define their in-house or hybrid-delivery software development process through every stage of the design, development and testing stages. This phased approach to implementing a integrated and automated SDLC process allows us to leverage best practices, industry standards, and sound framework specifically customized solutions for our customers with minimal impact to current initiatives. The results are improved predictability, repeatability, quality and change readiness in complete software development lifecycle. Services • Fast-track implementation, upgrade, migration, training, integration, and design for the HP Application Lifecycle Management suite and more. How • 33 By creating a customize methodology and modular approach for connecting Your current development strategy and information specifically design for or clients. Industry-proven modular reference models, assets, intellectual property packages and methodologies focus on how your IT group interacts with its business customers. Scalable solutions consistently use a building-block approach that can adapt to your unique needs as your organization grows and matures. © Copyright 2012 Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P. The information contained herein is subject to change without notice.
- 34. Deliverables and Outcomes- Declaration Highlight • Create Efficient, consistent and standardized method of managing releases, design, build ,and Test • Traceability across every phase of the SDLC • Integrate ALM with other systems − Both HP and 3rd Party products • Complete reporting matrix throughout the SDLC process − Real-time reporting and KPI's (scorecard) − Cross project reporting • Create Management Reports for Transparency − A highly effective three-tier reporting structure which leads to inform and accurate decision-making from every level of management • direct contributor, • management, • Leadership • Single click built-in CBT continue training using the Adaption readiness tool 34 © Copyright 2012 Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P. The information contained herein is subject to change without notice.
- 35. Thank you © Copyright2012 Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P. The information contained herein is subject to change without notice.
- 36. Built-in Process, Artifact,& Tool Release Management 36 © Copyright 2012 Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P. The information contained herein is subject to change without notice.
- 37. Built-in Process, Artifact,& Tool Release Management (Con’t) 37 © Copyright 2012 Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P. The information contained herein is subject to change without notice.
- 38. Built-in Process, Artifact,& Tool Design Management 38 © Copyright 2012 Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P. The information contained herein is subject to change without notice.
- 39. Built-in Process, Artifact,& Tool Build Management 39 © Copyright 2012 Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P. The information contained herein is subject to change without notice.
- 40. Built-in Process, Artifact,& Tool Test Management 40 © Copyright 2012 Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P. The information contained herein is subject to change without notice.
- 41. Built-in Process, Artifact,& Tool Test Management 41 © Copyright 2012 Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P. The information contained herein is subject to change without notice.
Editor's Notes
- #3 Our two primary tools within the SDLC have always been PPM and ALM which have to the unique roles within the SDLC and yet most sales personnel attempt to divide these products into organizational alignment such as project management office aligns directly with PPM and ALM for the most part is still sold directly as a QC solution for testing groups. As we all know the PMO groups often control most of the project discretionary funds and spending which also drives most companies adoptions of new process and methodologies. This is also the typical group that would spend large amounts of money on consistency in uniformity across IT and is always looking for an engine to drive their processes. The biggest issue with this is the PMO group is a typically not very technical and in often will view tools like ALM as to technical or rigid for their out-of-the-box thinking. Typically project managers would say something along the lines of "the tool should fit the process and not the other way around”. I have yet to walk into a meeting with the salesperson where he or she presented both solutions to the project management office group.The second scenario has to do mainly with our comfort level with our market share and the fear to compete directly with our competitors head-to-head and argue the points of the SDLC process in front of clients that we already have a foothold with as far as testing. That old Mercury tenacity replaced with market share complacency and residuals. While we have a far superior product (and I say that with confidence and experience) we still avoid open competition and competitiveness with our competitors both big and small. This is been playing now more and more often because we don't get the product specialist involved quick enough to counter or address our competitors marketing tactics. Relying on market share in an environment where social media has more power than a brand name such as HP our reliance on independent market research We must become more aggressive in all aspects of selling ALM as a complete application lifecycle management platform.
- #4 “Henry Ford developed the modern-day, assembly-line over 100 years ago, it was the catalyst for what we now know as our global economy. The key to this revolutionary idea was its simplicity. The concept was to automate the assembly process using the conveyor belt. In other words, Ford didn't address the fabrication of the car, he addressed the process in which the car was manufactured. He in turn was able to reduce the cost while increasing the quality of the product. HP has taken the same approach to the application lifecycle development process; each team within the SDLC process has become highly specialized and highly effective within their area of expertise. However, this has left them very siloed and ineffective when it comes to the whole SDLC process. HP believes by building-in automation, integration, real-time performance indicators and reliability into the complete software-development lifecycle process, IT organizations can now focus on reducing costs and improving quality.”
- #5 HP Software’s latest generation of Application Lifecycle Management, Quality Assurance, and Performance Validation products are squarely aimed at addressing velocities arch enemies. To help break-through organizational challenges, HP Software delivers collaborative systems that can be deployed globally and that provide deep real-time visibility to the up-to-the-minute health and associated action-items of complex software projects. With integrated social technology and full lifecycle traceability, HP Application Lifecycle Management helps ensure that business analysts, project managers, developers, and testers can constantly share vital information with each other, in full context. As we discussed in the previous slide, composite application development and testing constantly face delays associated with limited access to shared or public services, but it doesn’t have to be this way. Through the use of HP Service Virtualization, teams are able to build a dev/test cloud of virtualized (or simulated) services, removing impediments caused by limited access , and providing a smooth path to obstacle-freedevelopment and testing work.HP Software’s test automation and development lab management capability helps automate the laborious manual processes in dev and test—delivering lightning fast test execution across all modern environments, including cloud based testing of mobile, web, and other modern composite applications. I would like to explore these three areas by drilling down in particular to how HP Software adds value in Mobile, Agile, and composite applications. Let’s start with Mobile applications and have a look at success through the lens of Delta airlines.
- #6 The simplicity of answer sometimes gets lost in the complexity of the question which is why aren’t we able to sell a clearly superior product and services to clients that clearly need those products and services. ALM is a perfect platform in which a company or organization can build their software development lifecycle (SDLC) processes and methodology on top of this platform. To place ALM head of the pack for the management of the SDLC process we need to building new relationships with the people and groups that need a centralized SDLC management tool.
- #7 ALM best practices document with Project templates, Process training, and full delivery package (including Quick start). I also believe that we could find a new market around developing a complete CoE package by module. My thinking is that we are missing a market where we supply the complete packages including module by module best practices, process (with standard Documentation) and limited customization. The module packages would stand alone or fit together like pieces of puzzle Example; would be a client would like to use PS QC/ALM Defect management module with the process flow already built-in including documentation, training, etc… We then sale them a Defect Quick start module with Template, Tools, Documentation, Training, and support (upgrade, and patch). The client would then like to purchase the Test Plan, Resources and Business Process Testing modules project Templates which work fit perfectly with the Defect Module they purchase last year. Module Template designed with Best Practices, Process workflow, Documentation, tools, roles, and support:Defect and Reporting Module (I working on the Workflow)Test Plan Module which could included resources and business process testingRequirements Module including modeling toolsRelease and Version ModuleCross project Reporting and synchronization modulePerformance Center ModuleSystem Testing ModuleAutomation ToolsComplete ALM suite CoE including Templates
- #8 Now there is one more mega-trend that I would like to introduce – the accelerating time tables of modern application development In the user-centric world, apps are the heart of how people experience the enterprise. Before, the time required to take a business request and transform it into working functionality might be measured in months. But given the demands for a constant stream of new capabilities, now we measure delivery of new applications and services in weeks or even days. Of course this means a change to every aspect of the SDLC. This brings us to what we believe is a New IT Imperative.
- #10 BenefitsI 4ssues trends to support more informed decisions at the enterprise levelNew slide – whatsonshore and offshore resources, across multiple SDLC initiatives
- #11 Targeting the four key groups within the SDLC is absolutely critical to the future success of ALM as a platform for success and revenue for HP. The simplicity of answer sometimes gets lost in the complexity of the question which is why aren’t we able to sell a clearly superior product and services to clients that clearly need those products and services. While most groups would point to pricing and rightly so I would definitely counter with the fact that most IT groups are still increasing their budget yearly to address efficiency, product quality, and technology. We must stop catering to a specific group or team within the SDLC, while it's great to have advocates one specific group in the SDLC; however testing teams tend to have the smallest discretionary funds and even less influence of any of the four key groups within the SDLC. That is why I suggested focusing in on four key aspects which specifically to target those organizations/teams at each stage of the SDLC process. The answer to the complex question is all four groups have one thing in common and that is delivering an high-quality product in the least amount of time to the customer but to achieve that each group has specific and highly specialized characteristics.• Of course the most logical place to start is the release management by addressing key aspects that concern project management. PMO group's most corporations are the only group too has direct access to capital project's funding, which drives the largest majority of IT discretionary funds outside of operations or support. Release management primarily focuses in on project and application management from the aspect a single platform for clear and concise multitier reporting, tracking, and management that drive a single initiative through the SDLC process with the flexibility of handling one or more customized methodologies/strategies. How this needs to be approached is project managers look at tools such as PPM for their specific needs and not the overall SDLC process. We must elevate the conversation beyond budgeting and issue management and focus in on the more technical aspects in management of an application under development. For the most part, most PMO offices and medium to small corporations will look at PPM too much overhead for their company while ALM is really what they need.• During the design phase of the development process is by far one of the lowest tech areas of the SDLC process and by far been the lowest priority for innovation and automation of any single group based on the typical experience and level of a business analyst. While design modeling products are being marketed today, for the most part, these business analyst/business architect still rely on word documents, mockups, use cases, user stories, and spreadsheets. This phase is also known where most defects are introduced into the SDLC either through poor communications, invalid business rules, and most of all ambiguous requirements. The other characteristic of this phase of a SDLC process is the project delays or the inevitable scope creep that plagues SDLC process. This is a clear win for ALM against any other SDLC platform on the market today. I would be more than happy in great length on the subject. • Development phase and dealing with development groups has definitely been ALM's Achilles' heel since the inception of the ALM platform; however the capabilities of integrating correctly with the development toolset, specifically using IDE will definitely help but still places ALM at the back of the pack. Besides our lack of aggressiveness towards marketing ALM as a SDLC solution/platform our competitors both big and small have begun chipping away at our foothold in SDLC process and even furthermore gain a foothold in the testing groups by exploiting this gap. In addition not owning our own development IDE and code repository we suffer a character flaw when dealing with development groups which is we aren’t Microsoft or the other side of the spectrum which is freeware or shareware which are the two most common preferred criteria when selecting a specialized tools for individual developers. This grass-roots type of developer driven mentality is how a simple concept such as agile process now dominates most of the market and shareware tools like Atlassians JIRA can compete with us for market share.• Test management and testing teams which spawned ALM's innovations in structure is currently undergoing its own growing pains and internal issues in a lean SDLC process and the realization that the continuous testing and highly specialized expanded roles for testers and testing groups such as security, integration, and even the responsibility of unit testing which quickly becoming a reality. While we can’t afford to ignore the other 3 key groups within the SDLC process, we shouldn’t forget the group in the SDLC process they got us a seat at the table. In addition, we have ignored current market trends or chose to farm out products or services to so-called partners who allegiance to the HP brand is considered a one-way street and willingly sign partner agreements before the ink is cold on the contract with our competitors, or even worse the same partners will intentionally undermine our product line to promote their in-house solutions.
- #19 In software engineering, continuous integration (CI) implements continuous processes of applying quality control — small pieces of effort, applied frequently.Continuous integration aims to improve the quality of software, and to reduce the time taken to deliver it, by replacing the traditional practice of applying quality control after completing all development.”
- #20 This shows the different lifecycle stages involved in CI – that concerns agile planning/development/building/testing. While the stages themselves are well understood, CI requires specific best practices and automation to be introduced to co-ordinate across these lifecycle stages to enable high quality software that is commit ready in every iteration. We will discuss some of these best practices next