CS2103/T - Admin: tP week 6: Conceptualize the product

Conceptualize v1.2
Draft the UG
Refine the product design
Set up the project repo
Get familiar with the code base

indicates an individual task (i.e., each team member has to do the task, graded individually) while indicates a team task (some or all members may do the work; graded for the whole team).

tP tasks progress is graded. Completing individual and team tasks are considered for grading the project management component of your project grade.

5A. Process:

Evaluates: How well you did in project management related aspects of the project, as an individual and as a team

Based on: tutor/bot observations of project milestones and GitHub data

Grading criteria:

Project done iteratively and incrementally (opposite: doing most of the work in one big burst)

Milestones reached on time (i.e., the midnight before of the tutorial) (to get a good grade for this aspect, achieve at least 60% of the recommended milestone progress).
Good use of GitHub milestones
Good use of GitHub release mechanism
Good version control, based on the repo
Reasonable attempt to use the forking workflow
Good task definition, assignment and tracking, based on the issue tracker
Good use of buffers (opposite: everything at the last minute)

5B. Team-tasks:

Evaluates: How much you contributed to team-tasks

Here is a non-exhaustive list of team-tasks:

Setting up the GitHub team org/repo
Necessary general code enhancements e.g.,
1. Work related to renaming the product
2. Work related to changing the product icon
3. Morphing the product into a different product
Setting up tools e.g., GitHub, Gradle
Maintaining the issue tracker
Release management
Updating user/developer docs that are not specific to a feature e.g. documenting the target user profile
Incorporating more useful tools/libraries/frameworks into the product or the project workflow (e.g. automate more aspects of the project workflow using a GitHub plugin)

Based on: peer evaluations, tutor observations

Grading criteria: Do these to earn full marks.

Do close to an equal share of the team tasks (you can earn bonus marks by doing more than an equal share).
Merge code in at least four of weeks 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12

Most aspects of project progress are tracked using automated scripts. Please follow our instructions closely or else the script will not be able to detect your progress. We prefer not to waste admin resources processing requests for partial credit for work that did not follow the instructions precisely, unless the progress was not detected due to a bug in the script.

Milestone requirements are cumulative. The recommended progress for the mid-milestone is an implicit requirement for the actual milestone unless a milestone requirement overrides a mid-milestone requirement e.g., mid-milestone requires a document to be in a temp format while the actual milestone requires it to be in the proper format. Similarly, a requirement for milestone n is also an implicit requirement for milestone n+1 unless n+1 overrides the n requirement. This means if you miss some requirement at milestone n, you should try to achieve it before milestone n+1 or else it could be noted again as a 'missed requirement' at milestone n+1.

1 Conceptualize v1.2

Based on your user stories selected previously, conceptualize the product in terms of how it will look like at v1.2 in the form of a feature list.
Note down the feature list in your online project notes document.

2 Draft the UG

Draft a user guide in a convenient medium (e.g., a GoogleDoc) to describe what the product would be like when it is at v1.2.
- We recommend that you follow the AB3 User Guide in terms of structure and format.
- As this is a very rough draft and the final version will be in a different format altogether (i.e., in Markdown format), don't waste time in formatting, copy editing etc. It is fine as long as the tutor can get a rough idea of the features from this draft. You can also do just the 'Features' section and omit the other parts.
- Do try to come up with concrete command syntax for the CLI commands that you will deliver at v1.2.
- Include only features that will be delivered in v1.2.
- Consider including some UI mock-ups too (they can be hand-drawn or created using a tool such as PowerPoint, PlantUML or Balsamiq).
- Submission [one person per team]: Save the draft UG as a PDF file, name it {team-id}.pdf e.g., CS2103-T09-2.pdf, and upload to LumiNUS.

3 Refine the product design

Review the UG to ensure the features written by each member fit together to form a cohesive product. Note that cohesiveness of the product can affect the grading of the product design aspect.

1. Project Grading: Product Design [ 5 marks]

Evaluates: how well your features fit together to form a cohesive product (not how many features or how big the features are) and how well does it match the target user

Evaluated by:

tutors (based on product demo and user guide)
peers from other teams (based on peer testing and user guide)

Q Quality of the product design,
Evaluate based on the User Guide and the actual product behavior.

Criterion	Unable to judge	Low	Medium	High
`target user`	Not specified			Clearly specified and narrowed down appropriately
`value proposition`	Not specified	The value to target user is low. App is not worth using	Some small group of target users might find the app worth using	Most of the target users are likely to find the app worth using
`optimized for target user`		Not enough focus for CLI users	Mostly CLI-based, but cumbersome to use most of the time	Feels like a fast typist can be more productive with the app, compared to an equivalent GUI app without a CLI
`feature-fit`		Many of the features don't fit with others	Most features fit together but a few may be possible misfits	All features fit together to for a cohesive whole

In addition, feature flaws reported in the PE will be considered when grading this aspect.

These are considered feature flaws:
The feature does not solve the stated problem of the intended user i.e., the feature is 'incomplete'
Hard-to-test features
Features that don't fit well with the product
Features that are not optimized enough for fast-typists or target users

4 Set up the project repo

Set up the team org, the team repo, and individual forks as explained below:

tP Team Organization Setup

Please follow the organization/repo name format precisely or else our grading scripts will not be able to detect your work.

(/) Only one team member:

After receiving your team ID, one team member should do the following steps:

Create a GitHub organization with the following details:
- Organization name (all UPPER CASE) : AY2021S1-TEAM_ID. e.g. AY2021S1-CS2103T-W12-1, AY2021S1-CS2103-T09-2
- Plan: Open Source ($0/month)
- This organization belongs to: My personal account
Add members to the organization:
- Create a team called developers to your organization.
- Add your team members to the developers team.

tP Team Repo Setup

(/) Only one team member:

Fork the https://github.com/nus-cs2103-AY2021S1/tp repo to your team org.
- This repo (let's call it the team repo) is to be used as the repo for your project.
- Please do not rename the fork Reason: our grading scripts rely on the repo name.
Enable the issue tracker.
Enable GitHub Actions: Go to the Actions tab and enable workflows by clicking the button. That will enable the GitHub Actions that are already included in the repo you forked.
Set up the project website
Follow instructions in the Documentation guide page of AB3 developer guide. When set up correctly, your project website should be available via the URL https://ay2021s1-{team-id}.github.io/tp e.g., https://ay2021s1-cs2103-w13-1.github.io/tp.
Add members. Ensure your team members have the desired level of access to your team repo.
Recommended: Give admin access to 1-2 members and write access to others.
Create a team PR for us to track your project progress: i.e., create a PR from your team repo master branch to [nus-cs2103-AY2021S1/tp] master branch. PR name: [Team ID] Product Name e.g., [CS2103-T09-2] Contact List Pro. As you merge code to your team repo's master branch, this PR will auto-update to reflect how much your team's product has progressed.
Please fill in these details as specified because they are used by our grading scripts.
- PR subject: the name of your product e.g., InsureList
- Description: a 1-2 sentence overview (plain text only, no formatting or links) of your project indicating the target user and the value proposition e.g., InsureList helps insurance agents manage detail of their clients. It is optimized for CLI users so that frequent tasks can be done faster by typing in commands.

tP Individual Fork Setup

(, , , ...) Every team member:

Watch the tP repo (created above) i.e., go to the repo and click on the button to subscribe to activities of the repo.
Fork the tP repo to your personal GitHub account.
Please do not rename the fork Reason: our grading scripts rely on the repo name.
Clone the fork to your computer.
Set up the developer environment in your computer by following the Setting up and getting started page of AB3 developer guide.

Do not alter these paths in your project as our grading scripts depend on them.

src/main/java
src/test/java
docs

5 Get familiar with the code base

Ideally, you should do this task in this week (i.e., midnight before the week 6 tutorial), but you may take an extra week (i.e., by the week 7 tutorial) to finish them without penalty.
Do the following tutorials to get familiar with the codebase
- Tutorial 1 - Tracing a Command Execution Path
- Tutorial 2 - Removing a field from an entity
  - If you are an experienced programmer, you can remove a different field than the one given in the tutorial.
  - Submission: Do your changes in a branch named tutorial-removing-field and push to your fork.
- Tutorial 3 - Adding a new Command
  - If you are an experienced programmer, you can add a different command than the one given in the tutorial.
  - Submission: Do your changes in a branch named tutorial-adding-command, push to your fork, and create a PR from your fork to your team's repo.
The PRs created for tutorials need not be merged, unless the changes are actually in line with your project idea.
For reference, given below is the workflow you should follow when merging code in your tP:

tP Workflow

Read our reuse policy (in Admin: Appendix B), in particular, how to give credit when you reuse code from the Internet or classmates:

Policy on reuse

Reuse is encouraged. However, note that reuse has its own costs (such as the learning curve, additional complexity, usage restrictions, and unknown bugs). Furthermore, you will not be given credit for work done by others. Rather, you will be given credit for reusing work done by others.

You are allowed to reuse work from your classmates, subject to following conditions:
- The work has been shared publicly by us or the authors.
- You clearly give credit to the original author(s).
You are allowed to reuse work from external sources, subject to following conditions:
- The work comes from a source of 'good standing' (such as an established open source project). This means you cannot reuse code written by an outside 'friend'.
- You clearly give credit to the original author. Acknowledge use of third party resources clearly e.g. in the welcome message, splash screen (if any) or under the 'about' menu. If you are open about reuse, you are less likely to get into trouble if you unintentionally reused something copyrighted.
- You do not violate the license under which the work has been released. Please do not use 3rd-party images/audio in your software unless they have been specifically released to be used freely. Just because you found it in the Internet does not mean it is free for reuse.
- Always get permission from us before you reuse third-party libraries. Please post your 'request to use 3rd party library' in our forum. That way, the whole class get to see what libraries are being used by others.

Giving credit for reused work

Given below are how to give credit for things you reuse from elsewhere. These requirements are specific to this module i.e., not applicable outside the module (outside the module you should follow the rules specified by your employer and the license of the reused work)

If you used a third party library:

iP/tP: Mention in the README file (under the Acknowledgements section)
tP: Mention in the Project Portfolio Page if the library has a significant relevance to the features you implemented

If you reused code snippets found on the Internet e.g. from StackOverflow answers or
referred code in another software or
referred project code by current/past student:

If you read the code to understand the approach and implemented it yourself, mention it as a comment
Example:

//Solution below adapted from https://stackoverflow.com/a/16252290
{Your implmentation of the reused solution here ...}

If you copy-pasted a non-trivial code block (possibly with minor modifications renaming, layout changes, changes to comments, etc.), also mark the code block as reused code (using @@author tags with the -reused suffix)
Format:

//@@author {yourGithubUsername}-reused
//{Info about the source...}

{Reused code (possibly with minor modifications) here ...}

//@@author

Example of reusing a code snippet (with minor modifications):

persons = getList()
//@@author johndoe-reused
//Reused from https://stackoverflow.com/a/34646172 with minor modifications
Collections.sort(persons, new Comparator<CustomData>() {
    @Override
    public int compare(CustomData lhs, CustomData rhs) {
        return lhs.customInt > rhs.customInt ? -1 : 0;
    }
});
//@@author
return persons;

Giving credit to AB3 code: If your project started with the AB3 code and your new code follows a design similar to AB3, that doesn't mean you need to credit AB3 -- this is because new code is expected to follow existing code where possible, in the interest of consistency. However, don't take credit for existing AB3 code (i.e., ensure such code doesn't appear under your name in the tP code dashboard) unless you have modified them substantially.

Adding `@@author` tags indicate authorship

Mark your code with a //@@author {yourGithubUsername}. Note the double @.
The //@@author tag should indicates the beginning of the code you wrote. The code up to the next //@@author tag or the end of the file (whichever comes first) will be considered as was written by that author. Here is a sample code file:
```
//@@author johndoe
method 1 ...
method 2 ...
//@@author sarahkhoo
method 3 ...
//@@author johndoe
method 4 ...
```
If you don't know who wrote the code segment below yours, you may put an empty //@@author (i.e. no GitHub username) to indicate the end of the code segment you wrote. The author of code below yours can add the GitHub username to the empty tag later. Here is a sample code with an empty author tag:
```
method 0 ...
//@@author johndoe
method 1 ...
method 2 ...
//@@author
method 3 ...
method 4 ...
```
The author tag syntax varies based on file type e.g. for java, css, fxml. Use the corresponding comment syntax for non-Java files.
Here is an example code from an xml/fxml file.
```

<textbox>
  <label>...</label>
  <input>...</input>
</textbox>
...
```

Do not put the //@@author inside java header comments.
👎

/**
  * Returns true if ...
  * @@author johndoe
  */

👍

//@@author johndoe
/**
  * Returns true if ...
  */

What to and what not to annotate

Annotate both functional and test code There is no need to annotate documentation files.
Annotate only significant size code blocks that can be reviewed on its own e.g., a class, a sequence of methods, a method.
Claiming credit for code blocks smaller than a method is discouraged but allowed. If you do, do it sparingly and only claim meaningful blocks of code such as a block of statements, a loop, or an if-else statement.
- If an enhancement required you to do tiny changes in many places, there is no need to annotate all those tiny changes; you can describe those changes in the Project Portfolio page instead.
- If a code block was touched by more than one person, either let the person who wrote most of it (e.g. more than 80%) take credit for the entire block, or leave it as 'unclaimed' (i.e., no author tags).
- Related to the above point, if you claim a code block as your own, more than 80% of the code in that block should have been written by yourself. For example, no more than 20% of it can be code you reused from somewhere.
- GitHub has a blame feature and a history feature that can help you determine who wrote a piece of code.
Do not try to boost the quantity of your contribution using unethical means such as duplicating the same code in multiple places. In particular, do not copy-paste test cases to create redundant tests. Even repetitive code blocks within test methods should be extracted out as utility methods to reduce code duplication. Individual members are responsible for making sure code attributed to them are correct. If you notice a team member claiming credit for code that he/she did not write or use other questionable tactics, you can email us (after the final submission) to let us know.
If you wrote a significant amount of code that was not used in the final product,
- Create a folder called {project root}/unused
- Move unused files (or copies of files containing unused code) to that folder
- use //@@author {yourGithubUsername}-unused to mark unused code in those files (note the suffix unused) e.g.
```
//@@author johndoe-unused
method 1 ...
method 2 ...
```
Please put a comment in the code to explain why it was not used.
If you reused code from elsewhere, mark such code as //@@author {yourGithubUsername}-reused (note the suffix reused) e.g.
```
//@@author johndoe-reused
method 1 ...
method 2 ...
```
You can use empty @@author tags to mark code as not yours when RepoSense attribute the code to you incorrectly.
- Code generated by the IDE/framework, should not be annotated as your own.
- Code you modified in minor ways e.g. adding a parameter. These should not be claimed as yours but you can mention these additional contributions in the Project Portfolio page if you want to claim credit for them.

At the end of the project each student is required to submit a Project Portfolio Page.

PPP Objectives

For you to use (e.g. in your resume) as a well-documented data point of your SE experience
For evaluators to use as a data point for evaluating your project contributions

PPP Sections to include

Overview: A short overview of your product to provide some context to the reader. The opening 1-2 sentences may be reused by all team members. If your product overview extends beyond 1-2 sentences, the remainder should be written by yourself.
Summary of Contributions --Suggested items to include:
- Code contributed: Give a link to your code on tP Code Dashboard. The link is available in the Project List Page -- linked to the icon under your profile picture.
- Enhancements implemented: A summary of the enhancements you implemented.
- Contributions to documentation: Which sections did you contribute to the UG?
- Contributions to the DG: Which sections did you contribute to the DG? Which UML diagrams did you add/updated?
- Contributions to team-based tasks :
- Review/mentoring contributions: Links to PRs reviewed, instances of helping team members in other ways
- Contributions beyond the project team:
  - Evidence of helping others e.g. responses you posted in our forum, bugs you reported in other team's products,
  - Evidence of technical leadership e.g. sharing useful information in the forum

Keep in mind that evaluators will use the PPP to estimate your project effort. We recommend that you mention things that will earn you a fair score e.g., explain how deep the enhancement is, why it is complete, how hard it was to implement etc..

[Optional] Contributions to the Developer Guide (Extracts): Reproduce the parts in the Developer Guide that you wrote. Alternatively, you can show the various diagrams you contributed.
[Optional] Contributions to the User Guide (Extracts): Reproduce the parts in the User Guide that you wrote.

PPP Format

File name (i.e., in the repo): docs/team/githbub_username_in_lower_case.md e.g., docs/team/goodcoder123.md
Follow the example in the AddressBook-Level3

To convert the UG/DG/PPP into PDF format, go to the generated page in your project's github.io site and use this technique to save as a pdf file. Using other techniques can result in poor quality resolution (will be considered a bug) and unnecessarily large files.

Ensure hyperlinks in the pdf files work. Your UG/DG/PPP will be evaluated using PDF files during the PE. Broken/non-working hyperlinks in the PDF files will be considered as bugs and will count against your project score. Again, use the conversion technique given above to ensure links in the PDF files work.

The icon indicates team submissions. Only one person need to submit on behalf of the team but we recommend that others help verify the submission is in order i.e., the responsibility for (and any penalty for problems in) team submissions are best shared by the whole team rather than burden one person with it.

The icon indicates individual submissions.

PPP Page Limit

Content	Recommended	Hard Limit
Overview + Summary of contributions	0.5-1	2
[Optional] Contributions to the User Guide	1
[Optional] Contributions to the Developer Guide	3

The page limits given above are after converting to PDF format. The actual amount of content you require is actually less than what these numbers suggest because the HTML → PDF conversion adds a lot of spacing around content.

Follow the forking workflow in your project at least until (and including) v1.2 (you may tweak the workflow v1.3 onwards).

Protect the master branch: You can use GitHub's Protected Branches feature to protect your master branch against rogue PRs. We suggest the following:
- Go the the settings of your team repo.
- Click on the Branches option on the navigation menu on the left.
- Click the button. In the Branch protection rule page,
  - Specify the Branch name pattern to be master
  - Tick the option Require status checks to pass before merging to ensure that a branch has to pass CI before it can be merged into the master branch
  - If you think all PRs should be reviewed by someone other than the PR author before they are merged, also tick the Require pull request reviews before merging option.
Create issues to represent project tasks so that they can be tracked using the issue tracker features.
Create a PR when you implement a project task that updates the code. Remember to use a separate branch for each PR.
You can use GitHub's draft PRs feature to indicate that a PR is not yet ready for merging.
Get team members to review PRs. A workflow without PR reviews is a risky workflow.
- Follow the Best practices for reviewing PRs @SE-EDU/guides.
  PRO TIP LGTM is common abbreviation you can use in the review comments to mean Looks Good To Merge.
Go breadth-first iterative: As you are expected to follow breadth-first iterative approach, almost all code additions to the master branch should take the product from a working version to a slightly better working version.
- Bad Let's add all data classes first reason: this is the depth-first approach
- Bad Let's finish the part of the code that saves and loads data first reason: this is the depth-first approach
- Good Let's add code to support simple todo tasks first (i.e., read, delete, save, load)
Do not merge PRs failing Continuous Integration e.g., GitHub ActionsCI. The CI status of a PR is reported at the bottom of the conversation tab of the PR page. Here's an example:
- If there is a failure, you can click on the Details link in corresponding line to find out more about the failure. Once you figure out the cause of the failure, push the a fix to the PR.
After merging a PR,
- close the corresponding issue.
  PRO TIP You can use GitHub's Fixes #123 trick to get the issue to close automatically when the PR is merged.
- sync your repos with the team rep by pulling the latest master from the team repo and pushing it to your own fork.

Project Management → Revision Control →

Forking flow

In the forking workflow, the 'official' version of the software is kept in a remote repo designated as the 'main repo'. All team members fork the main repo and create pull requests from their fork to the main repo.

To illustrate how the workflow goes, let’s assume Jean wants to fix a bug in the code. Here are the steps:

Jean creates a separate branch in her local repo and fixes the bug in that branch.
Common mistake: Doing the proposed changes in the master branch -- if Jean does that, she will not be able to have more than one PR open at any time because any changes to the master branch will be reflected in all open PRs.
Jean pushes the branch to her fork.
Jean creates a pull request from that branch in her fork to the main repo.
Other members review Jean’s pull request.
If reviewers suggested any changes, Jean updates the PR accordingly.
When reviewers are satisfied with the PR, one of the members (usually the team lead or a designated 'maintainer' of the main repo) merges the PR, which brings Jean’s code to the main repo.
Other members, realizing there is new code in the upstream repo, sync their forks with the new upstream repo (i.e. the main repo). This is done by pulling the new code to their own local repo and pushing the updated code to their own fork.
Possible mistake: Creating another 'reverse' PR from the team repo to the team member's fork to sync the member's fork with the merged code. PRs are meant to go from downstream repos to upstream repos, not in the other direction.

A detailed explanation of the Forking Workflow - From Atlassian

Tools → Git and GitHub →

Forking workflow

You can follow the steps in the simulation of a forking workflow given below to learn how to follow such a workflow.

This activity is best done as a team.

Step 1. One member: set up the team org and the team repo.

Create a GitHub organization for your team. The org name is up to you. We'll refer to this organization as team org from now on.
Add a team called developers to your team org.
Add team members to the developers team.
Fork se-edu/samplerepo-workflow-practice to your team org. We'll refer to this as the team repo.
Add the forked repo to the developers team. Give write access.

Step 2. Each team member: create PRs via own fork.

Fork that repo from your team org to your own GitHub account.
Create a branch named add-{your name}-info (e.g. add-johnTan-info) in the local repo.
Add a file yourName.md into the members directory (e.g., members/jonhTan.md) containing some info about you into that branch.
Push that branch to your fork.
Create a PR from that branch to the master branch of the team repo.

Step 3. For each PR: review, update, and merge.

[A team member (not the PR author)] Review the PR by adding comments (can be just dummy comments).
[PR author] Update the PR by pushing more commits to it, to simulate updating the PR based on review comments.
[Another team member] Approve and merge the PR using the GitHub interface.
[All members] Sync your local repo (and your fork) with upstream repo. In this case, your upstream repo is the repo in your team org.

Step 4. Create conflicting PRs.

[One member]: Update README: In the master branch, remove John Doe and Jane Doe from the README.md, commit, and push to the main repo.
[Each team member] Create a PR to add yourself under the Team Members section in the README.md. Use a new branch for the PR e.g., add-johnTan-name.

Step 5. Merge conflicting PRs one at a time. Before merging a PR, you’ll have to resolve conflicts.

[Optional] A member can inform the PR author (by posting a comment) that there is a conflict in the PR.
[PR author] Resolve the conflict locally:
1. Pull the master branch from the repo in your team org.
2. Merge the pulled master branch to your PR branch.
3. Resolve the merge conflict that crops up during the merge.
4. Push the updated PR branch to your fork.
[Another member or the PR author]: Merge the de-conflicted PR: When GitHub does not indicate a conflict anymore, you can go ahead and merge the PR.

After following the given workflow for at least i.e., until the end of v1.2one iteration, optionally, you may adjust the process rigor to suit your team's pace. Here are some examples:

Reduce automated tests: Automated tests have benefits, but they can be a pain to write/maintain.
It is OK to get rid of some of the troublesome tests and rely more on manual testing instead. The less automated tests you have, the higher the risk of regressions; but it may be an acceptable trade-off under the circumstances if tests are slowing you down too much.
There is no direct penalty for removing tests. Also note our expectation on test code.
Reduce automated checks: You can also reduce the rigor of checkstyle checks to expedite PR processing.
Switch to a lighter workflow: While forking workflow is the safest (and is recommended), it is also rather heavy. You may switch to a simpler workflow if the forking workflow if you wish. Refer the textbook to find more about alternative workflows: branching workflow, centralized workflow. Even if you do switch, we still recommend that you use PR reviews, at least for PRs affecting others' features.
If you are unsure if a certain adjustment is allowed, you can check with the teaching team first.

tP week 6: Conceptualize the product