Critical Analysis of Alternative Designs
Document a critical analysis of an alternative design. The analysis
should generally address questions such as:
- Are there technical problems with this design?
- Are there major omissions in this design (e.g. functionality,
security, performance, ...)?
- Is it feasible to implement this design by this team in the
timeframe allotted?
- Does the design satisfy the user's functional requirements?
- Does the design satisfy the user's non-functional requirements/
quality attributes?
Create the analysis with a partner (assigned below).
Each pair should turn in one analysis (two copies). One copy is for
Dr. Janzen, the other copy is for the team being analyzed.
The analysis should be a numbered list of items. Each item should
note the source for the comment (e.g. Design Spec section 3.2.1),
along with the criticism and suggestions for possible improvements.
Group your review items into the following categories:
- Technical Risks
- Information Risks
- Economic Risks
- Managerial Risks
Read the first three pages of
this article for general background on architecture reviews, and
examples of the four types of risks.
Partner Assignments/Team to Review:
- CALM: Girum I., Daniel J.
- CALM: Chad B., Stephanie B.
- CALM: Jeremy R.
- Ch4++: Alejandro C., Corey F.
- Ch4++: Clark D., Mark H.
- Codast Jegga: Neil G., Mark L.
- Codast Jegga: Haikal S, Cory K.
- Jellybean: Halli M., Brandon P.
- Jellybean: Brian M., Steven S.
- Jellybean: Daniel C., Martin S.
- Salsaforce: Erik S., Gagandeep K.
- Salsaforce: Chun P., Ziyang T.
- Salsaforce: Ray T., Hormoz T.