You might want to consider Prince 2 however that would depend on a number of factors, including any existing Project Management methods / processes already used within the company. It also doesn't articulate particularly well with most forms of agile methodologies in my opinion (others may disagree!) so if your company uses agile processes, it may not be too ...
I think DevOps defines the best practices here: specifically the principle of small batch sizes.
In other words, if the batch sizes (code commits) are small, then the code reviews can be frequent and short.
I would live with the frequency because that's more of an Agile thing and it's OK! Build a team culture that supports it. DevOps also tells us to ...
I suspect there is no single answer to this question.
Individuals are different. Some may find that doing a code review is a welcome distraction from their coding tasks. Others may struggle with the context switching or may not enjoy doing reviews.
Teams are also different. I can see the nature of code reviews varying depending on many factors including:
Ask yourself the question - "How do we do this today?". Then map that process to your Kanban board.
Most software/ product teams have people who perform multiple functions - and they are expected to perform these possibly multiple times in a day or depending on how heavy their own workload is, at specific times during the day or week, or even longer - ...
Code should be reviewed when someone is ready to review it, and when the team has the capacity to perform the code review without "stopping the line" or impacting other work-in-progress.
In any pull-queue system, work is pulled (never pushed) when someone is ready to work on it. So, work should be pulled into your "Code Review" column when:
Right and wrong in this case are values questions and therefor utterly unanswerable on an online forum. What we can speak to is the impact of this decision.
Largely, this is a question of what the team lead is looking to accomplish. If the hope is that by asking you to build API tests, the QA team becomes superfluous and can be skipped, the likely result is ...
Scrum intentionally does not layout exactly how the team will build the product. There are a number of reasons, but most pertinent to this question is that what works for one team may not work for another. Similarly, what works with the tools of the early 2000's may not apply as well today.
One of the reasons we work in iterations is because it gives us ...
It's important to realize that Kanban doesn't have anything to say about code reviews. It's simply a set of tools for visualizing and improving the workflow and flow of work through a workflow. There are a few key concepts - the Kanban board which provides a visualization of the workflow, work on the board, work-in-progress (WIP) limits, work ...
There's more to Kanban than just using a board to visualize the work. It seems like you may be missing two key aspects - a pull system and work-in-progress limits.
The workflow that you describe seems mostly correct. I would add one additional state between CODE_REVIEW and TESTING - READY_FOR_TESTING. This would help implementing a pull system, where the ...
Backlog and 'Fail-fast' are at the very foundation of agile development.
In a way, 'Failure in a sprint' is actually a desirable quality.
Failed sprint, according to me, is a well-executed sprint.
Failure facilitates continuous improvement.
100% success of sprint happens in 2 cases:
Team is complacent and is not pursuing ambitious goals.
I am personally adverse to the idea of ever saying a sprint 'failed'.
Scrum uses the term 'inspect' 27 times, and 'adapt' 16 times over the course of the guide.
Scrum also has no notion of 'failure', and the only reference to failure in Scrum is listed here:
Failure to include any of these events results in reduced transparency and is a lost ...
From the Scrum Guide:
During Sprint Planning the Scrum Team also crafts a Sprint Goal. The Sprint Goal is an objective that will be met within the Sprint through the implementation of the Product Backlog, and it provides guidance to the Development Team on why it is building the Increment.
So basically, in each Sprint it's not enough to keep yourself ...
According to Mike Cohn
It’s quite common for a team to have a bit of unfinished work at the end of an agile sprint or iteration. Ideally, a team would finish every item on its sprint backlog every sprint. But, for a variety of reasons, that isn’t always the case.
Accordingly to Scrum.org:
The Scrum Goal is the creation of productive and creative ...
A failed sprint means you did not reach the sprint goal.
That can mean all stories but one were completed, but that one was critical to reach the goal.
Only you can know whether this is the case here.
Keep in mind that the stories pulled into the sprint are a forecast of what the team should be able to do. Saying "all stories must be done" as some ...
Ask Your Instructor
The problem with tests, especially academic ones, is that only the test developer knows why they think a given answer is correct. In a school context, the only way to know for sure is to ask your instructor.
All the terms you can choose relate to how activities are measured, rather than defining how the two tasks interrelate ...
What’s the relationship between the test planning activity and the testing activity?
The answer should be:
C. Finish-to-Start (FS)
The test planning activity needs to finish, in order to start the testing activity. The highlighted test response might be wrong. It happens.