systematic software reviews software reviews are a “quality improvement processes for written...
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Systematic Software Reviews Software reviews are a “quality improvement processes for written material”](https://reader030.vdocuments.site/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649cad5503460f9496f208/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Systematic Software Reviews
Software reviews are a “quality improvement processes for written material”.
![Page 2: Systematic Software Reviews Software reviews are a “quality improvement processes for written material”](https://reader030.vdocuments.site/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649cad5503460f9496f208/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Systematic Software Reviews
Help support the objectives of:• Project management• Systems engineering• Verification and validation• Configuration management• Quality assurance
![Page 3: Systematic Software Reviews Software reviews are a “quality improvement processes for written material”](https://reader030.vdocuments.site/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649cad5503460f9496f208/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Software Life Cycle
Reviews are applicable to software products throughout the software life cycle• Requirements• Design• Coding• Testing• Maintenance
![Page 4: Systematic Software Reviews Software reviews are a “quality improvement processes for written material”](https://reader030.vdocuments.site/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649cad5503460f9496f208/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Common Attributes:
Systematic reviews have these attributes in common:• Team participation• Documented results of the review• Documented procedures for
conducting the review
![Page 5: Systematic Software Reviews Software reviews are a “quality improvement processes for written material”](https://reader030.vdocuments.site/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649cad5503460f9496f208/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Goal and Motivation:
By detecting defects early, and preventing their leakage downstream, the higher cost of later detection and rework is eliminated.
![Page 6: Systematic Software Reviews Software reviews are a “quality improvement processes for written material”](https://reader030.vdocuments.site/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649cad5503460f9496f208/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Basic Steps:
• Using a static analysis technique, • Perform a visual examination of
the software products• Detect and correct:
• Defects• Violation of design standards• Other problems
![Page 7: Systematic Software Reviews Software reviews are a “quality improvement processes for written material”](https://reader030.vdocuments.site/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649cad5503460f9496f208/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
What is a Software Product
The term “software product” is used in a very broad sense to describe any document produced during the software lifecycle.
![Page 8: Systematic Software Reviews Software reviews are a “quality improvement processes for written material”](https://reader030.vdocuments.site/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649cad5503460f9496f208/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Examples of Software Products
Include: Contracts Installation plans Progress reports Software design descriptions Release notes Software requirements
specifications Source code
![Page 9: Systematic Software Reviews Software reviews are a “quality improvement processes for written material”](https://reader030.vdocuments.site/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649cad5503460f9496f208/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
What Is a Defect?
Any occurrence in a work product that is determined to be incomplete, incorrect, or missing
Any instance which a requirement is not satisfied(Fagan, 1986)
Informal synonyms:bug, fault, issue, problem
![Page 10: Systematic Software Reviews Software reviews are a “quality improvement processes for written material”](https://reader030.vdocuments.site/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649cad5503460f9496f208/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Inspections vs. Reviews
The IEEE Standard for Software Reviews defines 5 types of review:• Management Reviews• Technical Reviews• Inspections (Formal Peer Review)• Walk-throughs• Audits
![Page 11: Systematic Software Reviews Software reviews are a “quality improvement processes for written material”](https://reader030.vdocuments.site/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649cad5503460f9496f208/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Why 5 types?
Different types of reviews reflect differences in the goals of each review type
![Page 12: Systematic Software Reviews Software reviews are a “quality improvement processes for written material”](https://reader030.vdocuments.site/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649cad5503460f9496f208/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Origins: Fagan’s Inspection
Michael E. Fagan IBM, Kingston, NY laboratories Applied hardware statistical quality
and process control methods to “ideas on paper”
![Page 13: Systematic Software Reviews Software reviews are a “quality improvement processes for written material”](https://reader030.vdocuments.site/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649cad5503460f9496f208/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Origins: Continued
“Design and code inspections to reduce errors in program development” (1976)
Inspections = improved quality + less cost
Scope of application expanded
![Page 14: Systematic Software Reviews Software reviews are a “quality improvement processes for written material”](https://reader030.vdocuments.site/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649cad5503460f9496f208/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Performance
No Revs.
Revs
Reviews improve schedule performance
Req Design Code Test
R
R
R R
![Page 15: Systematic Software Reviews Software reviews are a “quality improvement processes for written material”](https://reader030.vdocuments.site/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649cad5503460f9496f208/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Performance ContinuedReviews reduce rework.
• Rework accounts for 44% of development. Cost!
• Requirements (1%)
• Design (12%)
• Coding (12%)
• Testing (19%)
Reviews are pro-active tests.
• Find errors not possible through testing.
Reviews are training.
• Domain, corporate standards, group.
![Page 16: Systematic Software Reviews Software reviews are a “quality improvement processes for written material”](https://reader030.vdocuments.site/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649cad5503460f9496f208/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Quality Improvement Reviews can find 60-100% of all defects. Reviews are technical, not
management. Review data can assess/improve quality
of: Work product. Software development process. Review process itself.
![Page 17: Systematic Software Reviews Software reviews are a “quality improvement processes for written material”](https://reader030.vdocuments.site/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649cad5503460f9496f208/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Quality Improvement Continued
Reviews reduce total project cost, but have non-trivial cost (~15%).
Early defect removal is 10-100 times cheaper.
Reviews distribute domain knowledge, development skills, and corporate culture.
![Page 18: Systematic Software Reviews Software reviews are a “quality improvement processes for written material”](https://reader030.vdocuments.site/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649cad5503460f9496f208/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Industry Experience With Reviews
Aetna Insurance Company: FTR found 82% of errors, 25% cost reduction.
Bell-Northern Research: Inspection cost: 1 hour per defect. Testing cost: 2-4 hours per defect. Post-release cost: 33 hours per defect.
Hewlett-Packard Est. inspection savings (1993): $21,454,000
IBM C system software No errors from time of first compile.
![Page 19: Systematic Software Reviews Software reviews are a “quality improvement processes for written material”](https://reader030.vdocuments.site/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649cad5503460f9496f208/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Measuring Impact
Return on Investment:ROI = net savings
Detection cost
• Net savings = cost avoidance – cost to repair now
• Detection cost = cost of preparation + cost to conduct
![Page 20: Systematic Software Reviews Software reviews are a “quality improvement processes for written material”](https://reader030.vdocuments.site/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649cad5503460f9496f208/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Details of the Five Types of Software Review
![Page 21: Systematic Software Reviews Software reviews are a “quality improvement processes for written material”](https://reader030.vdocuments.site/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649cad5503460f9496f208/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Management Reviews Overview Performed by those directly
responsible for the system Monitor progress Determine status of plans and
schedules Confirm requirements and their
system allocation Or, evaluate management approaches
used to achieve fitness or purpose
![Page 22: Systematic Software Reviews Software reviews are a “quality improvement processes for written material”](https://reader030.vdocuments.site/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649cad5503460f9496f208/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Management Reviews Overview Continued
Support decisions made about:• Corrective actions• Changes in the allocation of resources• Or changes to the scope of the project.
![Page 23: Systematic Software Reviews Software reviews are a “quality improvement processes for written material”](https://reader030.vdocuments.site/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649cad5503460f9496f208/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Management Reviews Continued
Software products reviewed Audit Reports Contingency plans Installation plans Risk management plans Software Q/A
![Page 24: Systematic Software Reviews Software reviews are a “quality improvement processes for written material”](https://reader030.vdocuments.site/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649cad5503460f9496f208/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Management Reviews Roles
Required:• Decision Maker• Review Leader• Recorder• Management Staff• Technical Staff
![Page 25: Systematic Software Reviews Software reviews are a “quality improvement processes for written material”](https://reader030.vdocuments.site/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649cad5503460f9496f208/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Management Reviews Outputs
Documented evidence that identifies:• Project under review• Review team members• Review objects• Software product reviewed• Inputs to the review• Action item status• List of defects identified by the review team
![Page 26: Systematic Software Reviews Software reviews are a “quality improvement processes for written material”](https://reader030.vdocuments.site/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649cad5503460f9496f208/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Technical Reviews Overview
Confirms that product Conforms to specifications Adheres to regulations, standards,
guidelines, plans Changes are properly implemented Changes affect only those system areas
identified by the change specification
![Page 27: Systematic Software Reviews Software reviews are a “quality improvement processes for written material”](https://reader030.vdocuments.site/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649cad5503460f9496f208/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
Technical Reviews Continued
Software products subject to technical reviews
• Software requirements specification• Software design description• Software test documentation• Software user documentation• Installation procedure• Release notes
![Page 28: Systematic Software Reviews Software reviews are a “quality improvement processes for written material”](https://reader030.vdocuments.site/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649cad5503460f9496f208/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
Technical Reviews Roles
The roles established for the technical review
• Decision maker• Review leader• Recorder• Technical staff
![Page 29: Systematic Software Reviews Software reviews are a “quality improvement processes for written material”](https://reader030.vdocuments.site/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649cad5503460f9496f208/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
Technical Reviews Outputs
Outputs, documented evidence that identifies:• Project under review• Review team members• Software product reviewed• Inputs to the review• Review objectives and status• List of resolved and unresolved software defects• List of unresolved system or hardware defects• List of management issues• Action item status• Recommendations for unresolved issues• Whether software product meets specification
![Page 30: Systematic Software Reviews Software reviews are a “quality improvement processes for written material”](https://reader030.vdocuments.site/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649cad5503460f9496f208/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
Inspection (Formal Peer Reviews)
Confirms that the software product satisfies Specifications Specified quality attributes regulations, standards, guidelines, plans Identifies deviations from standard and
specification
Failure to do so results in logging a defect
![Page 31: Systematic Software Reviews Software reviews are a “quality improvement processes for written material”](https://reader030.vdocuments.site/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649cad5503460f9496f208/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
Inspections Continued
Software products subject to Inspections• Software requirements specification• Software design description• Source code• Software test documentation• Software user documentation• Maintenance manual• Release notes
![Page 32: Systematic Software Reviews Software reviews are a “quality improvement processes for written material”](https://reader030.vdocuments.site/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649cad5503460f9496f208/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
Inspections Roles
The roles established for the Inspection• Inspection leader• Recorder• Reader• Author• Inspector
![Page 33: Systematic Software Reviews Software reviews are a “quality improvement processes for written material”](https://reader030.vdocuments.site/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649cad5503460f9496f208/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
Inspections Outputs
Outputs, documented evidence that identifies:• Project under inspection• Inspection team members• Inspection meeting duration• Software product inspected• Size of the materials inspected• Inputs to inspection• Inspection objectives and status• Defect list (detail)• Defect summary list• Disposition of the software product• Estimate of the rework effort and completion date
![Page 34: Systematic Software Reviews Software reviews are a “quality improvement processes for written material”](https://reader030.vdocuments.site/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649cad5503460f9496f208/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
Walk-throughs
• Evaluate a software product• Sometimes used for educating an
audience• Major objectives:
• Find anomalies• Improve the software product• Consider alternative implementations• Evaluate performance to standards and
specs
![Page 35: Systematic Software Reviews Software reviews are a “quality improvement processes for written material”](https://reader030.vdocuments.site/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649cad5503460f9496f208/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
Walk-throughs Continued
Software products subject to walk-throughs
• Software requirements specification• Software design description• Source code• Software test documentation• Software user documentation• Maintenance manual• Release notes
![Page 36: Systematic Software Reviews Software reviews are a “quality improvement processes for written material”](https://reader030.vdocuments.site/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649cad5503460f9496f208/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
Walk-throughs Roles
The roles established for Walk-throughs• Walk-through leader• Recorder• Author• Team member
![Page 37: Systematic Software Reviews Software reviews are a “quality improvement processes for written material”](https://reader030.vdocuments.site/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649cad5503460f9496f208/html5/thumbnails/37.jpg)
Walk-throughs Outputs
The outputs of the walk-through• Walk-through team members• Software product being evaluated• Statement of objectives and their status• Recommendations made regarding each
anomaly• List of actions, due-dates, responsible parties• Recommendations how to dispose of
unresolved anomalies• Any proposal for future walk-throughs
![Page 38: Systematic Software Reviews Software reviews are a “quality improvement processes for written material”](https://reader030.vdocuments.site/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649cad5503460f9496f208/html5/thumbnails/38.jpg)
Audits
The purpose of an audit is to provide an independent evaluation of conformance of software products and processes to applicable;
Regulations Standards Guidelines Plans Procedures
![Page 39: Systematic Software Reviews Software reviews are a “quality improvement processes for written material”](https://reader030.vdocuments.site/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649cad5503460f9496f208/html5/thumbnails/39.jpg)
Systematic Software Reviews
Comparison of Review Types(see handout, Annex B)
IEE Std 1028-1997
![Page 40: Systematic Software Reviews Software reviews are a “quality improvement processes for written material”](https://reader030.vdocuments.site/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649cad5503460f9496f208/html5/thumbnails/40.jpg)
Review & Inspection Process
Materials, Methods, and Roles
![Page 41: Systematic Software Reviews Software reviews are a “quality improvement processes for written material”](https://reader030.vdocuments.site/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649cad5503460f9496f208/html5/thumbnails/41.jpg)
Review Materials Source Document Checklist Supporting Documents Invitation Master Plan Issue/Defect Log Data Summary
![Page 42: Systematic Software Reviews Software reviews are a “quality improvement processes for written material”](https://reader030.vdocuments.site/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649cad5503460f9496f208/html5/thumbnails/42.jpg)
Review Methods Synchronous
Traditional Approach Meeting-based
Asynchronous Relatively new area Meeting replaced with email (or other
electronic) communication
![Page 43: Systematic Software Reviews Software reviews are a “quality improvement processes for written material”](https://reader030.vdocuments.site/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649cad5503460f9496f208/html5/thumbnails/43.jpg)
Synchronous Review Most popular is the Fagan method
Review is separated into 5/6 phases1. (Planning)2. Overview3. Preparation4. Inspection5. Rework6. Follow-up
![Page 44: Systematic Software Reviews Software reviews are a “quality improvement processes for written material”](https://reader030.vdocuments.site/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649cad5503460f9496f208/html5/thumbnails/44.jpg)
Planning/Overview Reviewers are
selected Roles are
assigned Documents are
distributed General review
task is discussed
![Page 45: Systematic Software Reviews Software reviews are a “quality improvement processes for written material”](https://reader030.vdocuments.site/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649cad5503460f9496f208/html5/thumbnails/45.jpg)
Review Roles
Roles for a Review
A u th or(C re a to r o f d o cu m en t[s ])
In sp ec to rs(R e v iew e rs o f d ocu m en t[s ])
S c ribe(R e co rd e r)
L e ad er(M o d e ra to r)
![Page 46: Systematic Software Reviews Software reviews are a “quality improvement processes for written material”](https://reader030.vdocuments.site/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649cad5503460f9496f208/html5/thumbnails/46.jpg)
Roles: Leader Manages inspection Acts as moderator Determines document worthiness Identifies/invites reviewers Assigns roles Distributes documents Schedules meeting times/locations
![Page 47: Systematic Software Reviews Software reviews are a “quality improvement processes for written material”](https://reader030.vdocuments.site/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649cad5503460f9496f208/html5/thumbnails/47.jpg)
Roles: Author Creates the document for review Assists with answering questions Typically not directly involved in
review Makes corrections to document if
necessary
![Page 48: Systematic Software Reviews Software reviews are a “quality improvement processes for written material”](https://reader030.vdocuments.site/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649cad5503460f9496f208/html5/thumbnails/48.jpg)
Roles: Inspector/Reviewer Complete familiarization of document on
time Review document(s) for defects Look for assigned defects (if appropriate) Make use of checklists or other
supporting documents Contact leader early if problems arise or
if the review might be a waste of time
![Page 49: Systematic Software Reviews Software reviews are a “quality improvement processes for written material”](https://reader030.vdocuments.site/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649cad5503460f9496f208/html5/thumbnails/49.jpg)
Roles: Scribe/Recorder Records issues as they are raised Ideally not the moderator or
reviewer Record information legibly
![Page 50: Systematic Software Reviews Software reviews are a “quality improvement processes for written material”](https://reader030.vdocuments.site/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649cad5503460f9496f208/html5/thumbnails/50.jpg)
Preparation Reviewers
acquaint themselves with the documents to be reviewed
Need to be familiar with material in time for review meeting
![Page 51: Systematic Software Reviews Software reviews are a “quality improvement processes for written material”](https://reader030.vdocuments.site/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649cad5503460f9496f208/html5/thumbnails/51.jpg)
Inspection/Review Meeting Review team
attempts to locate defects
Defects are not fixed at this point
Meeting < 2 hours long!
![Page 52: Systematic Software Reviews Software reviews are a “quality improvement processes for written material”](https://reader030.vdocuments.site/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649cad5503460f9496f208/html5/thumbnails/52.jpg)
Inspection/Review (cont.) Round-robin approach or Reader
approach Scribe records all issues
Where defect was located Why is it a defect (cite requirement or checklist) Suggested severity level (Major, minor) Do Not record names of reviewers with defect Try to make visible to all participants (avoid
duplication)
![Page 53: Systematic Software Reviews Software reviews are a “quality improvement processes for written material”](https://reader030.vdocuments.site/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649cad5503460f9496f208/html5/thumbnails/53.jpg)
Rework Author receives
defect log Identifies true
defects vs. “false positives”
Fixes defects, provides justification for false positive
![Page 54: Systematic Software Reviews Software reviews are a “quality improvement processes for written material”](https://reader030.vdocuments.site/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649cad5503460f9496f208/html5/thumbnails/54.jpg)
Follow-Up Leader verifies all
defects have been addressed
Decides if document passes review or if another review is necessary
![Page 55: Systematic Software Reviews Software reviews are a “quality improvement processes for written material”](https://reader030.vdocuments.site/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649cad5503460f9496f208/html5/thumbnails/55.jpg)
Synchronous Review Process
Product Documents
Review Process
Planning/Ov erv iew Preparation Inspection Rework
Entry
Rev iewedDocuments
Exit
Product Documents Rules/Checklist
![Page 56: Systematic Software Reviews Software reviews are a “quality improvement processes for written material”](https://reader030.vdocuments.site/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649cad5503460f9496f208/html5/thumbnails/56.jpg)
Synchronous/Meeting Review Pros
Synergy Education Scheduled Deadline Competition Minimize “false
positives”
Cons Cost (lost production
time vs. cost of defect)
Difficult scheduling of time/location for wide-spread reviewers
![Page 57: Systematic Software Reviews Software reviews are a “quality improvement processes for written material”](https://reader030.vdocuments.site/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649cad5503460f9496f208/html5/thumbnails/57.jpg)
Asynchronous Review Formal, Technical, Asynchronous Review Method
(FTArm) Developed by Philip Johnson at Univ. of Hawaii
Phase 1: Select Personnel and Organize Documentation Phase 2: Orientation of Participants to Assigned Task Phase 3: Private Review Phase 4: Public Review Phase 5: Consolidation
Communication not performed in traditional meeting
Email Bulletin Board
![Page 58: Systematic Software Reviews Software reviews are a “quality improvement processes for written material”](https://reader030.vdocuments.site/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649cad5503460f9496f208/html5/thumbnails/58.jpg)
FTArm Method Pros
Reviewers formulate opinions in private
Opinions are discussed in public and voted on
During public voting, less experienced reviewers can learn from more experienced reviewers
Additional defects can be uncovered during public phase
Compromise can be reached on opposing opinions
Suitable for wide-spread reviewers
Cons All ideas must be voted
on If compromise can not
be reached, synchronous meeting should be used to reach one
![Page 59: Systematic Software Reviews Software reviews are a “quality improvement processes for written material”](https://reader030.vdocuments.site/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649cad5503460f9496f208/html5/thumbnails/59.jpg)
Asynchronous Review Process
Product Documents
Review Process
Face-to-Face
Private Review Rework
Entry
Reviewed Documents
Exit
Product Documents Rules/Checklist
Planning/Overview
Public Review
![Page 60: Systematic Software Reviews Software reviews are a “quality improvement processes for written material”](https://reader030.vdocuments.site/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649cad5503460f9496f208/html5/thumbnails/60.jpg)
Review Pitfalls Insufficient Preparation Moderator Domination Incorrect Review Rate Ego-involvement and Personality
Conflict Issue Resolution and Meeting Digression Recording Difficulties and Clerical
Overhead
![Page 61: Systematic Software Reviews Software reviews are a “quality improvement processes for written material”](https://reader030.vdocuments.site/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649cad5503460f9496f208/html5/thumbnails/61.jpg)
References/Resources Collofello, James S.: “The Software Technical Review Process”, SEI
Curriculum Module SEI-CM-3-1.5, 1998 Carnegie Mellon Software Engineering Institute, (visited 3/31/2001),
http://www.sei.cmu.edu/str/descriptions_body.html Ferguson, John D.: “Groupware Support for Asynchronous Document
Review”, Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Computer Documentation, 1999, pp. 185-192
Gilb, Tomas & Graham Dorothy:Software Inspection, Addison Wesley Longman Ltd, 1996, pp 2-13, 15-25, Glossary
IEEE Standard for Software Reviews, IEEE Std 1028-1997, 1998 pp 1-26, Annex B
Johnson, Philip M. & Tjahjono, Danu: “Assessing software review meetings: A controlled experimental study using CSRS”, Proceedings of the 1997 International Conference on Software Engineering, 1997, pp. 118-127
Johnson, Philip M.: “An Instrumented Approach to Improving Software Quality through Formal Technical Review”, Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Software Engineering, 1994, pp. 113-122
![Page 62: Systematic Software Reviews Software reviews are a “quality improvement processes for written material”](https://reader030.vdocuments.site/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649cad5503460f9496f208/html5/thumbnails/62.jpg)
References/Resources Continued Johnson, Philip M.: The WWW Formal Technical Review Archive, (visited
2/9/2001), http://www2.ics.hawaii.edu/~johnson/FTR/ Johnson, Philip M.:”Introduction to Formal Technical Reviews, A
PowerPoint presentation” The WWW Formal Technical Review Archive, http://www2.ics.hawaii.edu/~johnson/FTR/
Knight, John C. & Myers, E. Ann: “An Improved Inspection Technique”, Communications of the ACM, 1993, Vol. 36 No. 11, pp. 51-61
McConnell, Steve: Software Project Survival Guide, Microsoft Press, 1998 Ranganathan, Kala:”How to Make Software Peer Reviews Work”, Quality
Process, Bell & Howell Information and Learning Company, American Society for Quality, 2/01/2001
Rigby, Ken: Design Reviews, (visited 3/6/2001), http://sparc.airtime.co.uk/users/wysywig/desrev.htm
Weiss, Alan R. & Kimbrough, Kerry: Weiss and Kimbrough Inspection Materials, (visited 3/15/2001), http://www2.ics.hawaii.edu/~johnson/FTR/Weiss/weiss