Loading...

Change Owns to Parent Ofs

Set start and due date...

Xporter

XML

Word

Printable

Details

Type: Enabler
Priority: Must have
Fix Version/s: PI17
Component/s: COM SDP SW
Labels:
- LOW_SUT2
- MID_SUT3

ARTs:

Data Processing
Benefit hypothesis:

Hide

See "Why?" in description.

Show
See "Why?" in description.
Acceptance criteria:

Hide

See "What?" in description.

Show
See "What?" in description.
Expect Dependencies:

Inter Program
Feature Points:
2
Initial Size:
2
WSJF:
0
Epic Link:
AA0.5 Observation Execution
Agile Teams:

Team_NALEDI, Team_ORCA, Team_YANDA
Due Sprint:
Sprint 5
Story Point Burn-up:
Overdue:
Outcomes:
Hide

ORCA contribution:

Mid and Low imaging scenario notebooks support: Only small support was needed, this is documented on the various ORCA tickets: ORC-1505, ORC-1507, ORC-1526 (no contact from them, discarded), ORC-1557, ORC-1579

Mid and Low test plan work:

support summarized on the ORCA tickets: ORC-1508, ORC-1527, ORC-1558, ORC-1580

We led the definition of the Mid SUT1.8 behaviour:

Confluence page with discussions and agreed Scenarios: https://confluence.skatelescope.org/display/SE/Mid+Test+Plan+PI17+-+SUT1.8

Related XTP tickets in JIRA:

Scenarios: XTP-16844

Background (given steps): XTP-17520

Test integration into SKAMPI didn't happen, instead adding the visibility receive test: Draft MR for the visibility receive test

We have captured our experience with adding a BDD test to SKAMPI on Confluence: https://confluence.skatelescope.org/display/SE/Draft%3A+SKAMPI+BDD+tests%3A+what+it+is+like+to+implement+one

YANDA contribution:
A number of coordination meetings were attended by team members. SUT1.8 test code was partially derived from test code previously written by Yanda in earlier PIs. No requests for new test code had actually materialized. Potential targets had included SUT1.7, SUT3.4 and SUT3.5.

NALEDI contribution

Participated in general coordination meetings identified SUT scenario to contribute toward.

An X-Ray ticket for SUT 3.1 has been created: https://jira.skatelescope.org/browse/XTP-17103

Skeleton for scenario created https://gitlab.com/ska-telescope/ska-skampi/-/merge_requests/720
Show
ORCA contribution: Mid and Low imaging scenario notebooks support: Only small support was needed, this is documented on the various ORCA tickets: ORC-1505, ORC-1507, ORC-1526 (no contact from them, discarded), ORC-1557, ORC-1579 Mid and Low test plan work: support summarized on the ORCA tickets: ORC-1508, ORC-1527, ORC-1558, ORC-1580 We led the definition of the Mid SUT1.8 behaviour: Confluence page with discussions and agreed Scenarios: https://confluence.skatelescope.org/display/SE/Mid+Test+Plan+PI17+-+SUT1.8 Related XTP tickets in JIRA: Scenarios: XTP-16844 Background (given steps): XTP-17520 Test integration into SKAMPI didn't happen, instead adding the visibility receive test: Draft MR for the visibility receive test We have captured our experience with adding a BDD test to SKAMPI on Confluence: https://confluence.skatelescope.org/display/SE/Draft%3A+SKAMPI+BDD+tests%3A+what+it+is+like+to+implement+one YANDA contribution: A number of coordination meetings were attended by team members. SUT1.8 test code was partially derived from test code previously written by Yanda in earlier PIs. No requests for new test code had actually materialized. Potential targets had included SUT1.7, SUT3.4 and SUT3.5. NALEDI contribution Participated in general coordination meetings identified SUT scenario to contribute toward. An X-Ray ticket for SUT 3.1 has been created: https://jira.skatelescope.org/browse/XTP-17103 Skeleton for scenario created https://gitlab.com/ska-telescope/ska-skampi/-/merge_requests/720
Resolved PI.Sprint:
17.6

Feature Checklist:

Stories Completed, Outcomes Reviewed, Satisfies Acceptance Criteria, Accepted by FO

Requirement Status:

PI23 - UNCOVERED
Labels_MIRO:
LOW_SUT2 MID_SUT3

Description

Introduction

Deploying and testing the SDP as part of the integrated Low and Mid software systems is an important step towards the system integration tests and deployment at AA0.5. Doing this in a persistent environment enables us to get information on the stability on the system in a way that is not possible with ephemeral CI deployments. It also enables us to get early feedback from potential users of the system (AIV engineers and commissioning scientists) who have an opportunity to conduct manual testing before taking those next steps.

Who?

SDP and OMC ART developers.
AIV engineers.
Commissioning scientists.

What?

SDP is tested as part of the integrated Low and Mid software systems in persistent environments (see Low and Mid Software Integration Test Plans).
Support OMC teams to enhance the Mid imaging scenario notebook and develop the equivalent for Low.
Provide SDP contributions to user documentation for the integrated systems.

Why?

Enables feedback on the SDP from users of the integrated telescope software systems.
Supports OMC teams in developing and testing the imaging scenarios for Low and Mid.

References

SPO-2117: OMC goal for Low imaging scenario.
SPO-2122: OMC goal for Mid imaging scenario.
PI17 Low Software Integration Test Plan.
PI17 Mid Software Integration Test Plan.

Attachments

Issue Links

mentioned in: Page Loading...; Page Loading...; Page Loading...; Page Loading...

Structure

Activity

People

Assignee:: Ashdown, Mark

Reporter:: Ashdown, Mark

Votes:: 0 Vote for this issue

Watchers:: 2 Start watching this issue

Feature Progress

Story Point Burn-up: (100.00%)

Feature Estimate: 2.0

	Issues	Story Points
To Do	0	0.0
In Progress	0	0.0
Complete	14	23.0
Total	14	23.0

Dates

Created:: 17/Nov/22 6:36 PM

Updated:: 13/Feb/24 2:39 PM

Resolved:: 23/Feb/23 7:58 PM

Testing of SDP for Low and Mid in persistent environments