Verification and Validation Plan Peer Review

[arkinmodi]

DUE: November 4, 2022 + 2 Days of Grace Period

Team to Review: Team 7, 7eam Repository | Project Description

• Create at least 5 "deep" issues
  • Not typos or formatting mistakes
  • Focus on observations based on the SRS rubric
• Issues are prefixed with Team3 Review:
• Issues have the label Review-VnV-Team03
• Tag the TA grading Team 7
  • I assume Team 7's TA and not our TA, wording is confusing

Details: Lecture 8 - Hazard Analysis (Slide 4)

[arkinmodi]

1. Missing MG and MIS from Acronyms table
2. Missing "Verification and Validation Plan Verification Plan" and "Reflections" section
3. It is stated the both the SRS and Design plans will be verified "ad-hoc". This is not really a specific and clear plan.
4. "Look and Feel T1" and other places mention the use of a "User". Who is this "user" and/or where do you plan to get them from.
5. "Look and Feel T2", "Usability and Humanity T2" and "Performance T3" mention the use of a survey, but there is no survey attached in the document. This should be included to make the tests specific and clear.
6. "API Auth T5" says "Output: Success response is returned (500)". A 500 is Internal Server Error. This is not the appropriate status response code for this scenario.
7. Most, if not all, of your API tests state "Initial State: Not Applicable", however many of them depend on specific data being present in the database (i.e., the system being in a certain state).

[arkinmodi]

Peer Review Issues:

• https://github.com/TAsif/Team7Project/issues/49
• https://github.com/TAsif/Team7Project/issues/50
• https://github.com/TAsif/Team7Project/issues/51
• https://github.com/TAsif/Team7Project/issues/52
• https://github.com/TAsif/Team7Project/issues/53
• https://github.com/TAsif/Team7Project/issues/54
• https://github.com/TAsif/Team7Project/issues/55