Skip to main content

Reporting in xProcess

The mechanism for defining custom reports in xProcess is straightforward. It uses "Actions" (expressions which use OGNL as the language for navigating the xProcess model) and the string returned by the Action is exported to a file with whatever file extension is appropriate. There are several examples delivered with the Simple Process which are worth exploring and maybe modifying if you need a specific type of report for your project. See "How to define a custom report in v3" for more details.

Recently with users defining larger reports on projects that have been running for multiple years a problem has emerged with this mechanism - out-of-memory errors. As the text for the report is held in its entirety in memory, prior to any of it being written to file, it is clearly not too difficult to define an Action that will fail in this way if you have a reasonably large data source. To see and comment on the technical solution proposed for this problem, see the wiki for the open source project here: https://sourceforge.net/apps/mediawiki/xprocess/index.php?title=Core_Design. The new mechanism allows records to be written out one by one, but it will require reporting Actions to be rewritten to take advantage of the mechanism.

Watch this space for more details.

Update! See Tim's article on the new mechanism - http://xprocess.blogspot.com/2010/08/new-action-mechanism.html


Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Does your Definition of Done allow known defects?

Is it just me or do you also find it odd that some teams have clauses like this in their definition of done (DoD)?
... the Story will contain defects of level 3 severity or less only ... Of course they don't mean you have to put minor bugs in your code - that really would be mad - but it does mean you can sign the Story off as "Done"if the bugs you discover in it are only minor (like spelling mistakes, graphical misalignment, faults with easy workarounds, etc.). I saw DoDs like this some time ago and was seriously puzzled by the madness of it. I was reminded of it again at a meet-up discussion recently - it's clearly a practice that's not uncommon.

Let's look at the consequences of this policy. 

Potentially for every User Story that is signed off as "Done" there could be several additional Defect Stories (of low priority) that will be created. It's possible that finishing a Story (with no additional user requirements) will result in an increase in…

"Plan of Intent" and "Plan of Record"

Ron Lichty is well known in the Software Engineering community on the West Coast as a practitioner, as a seasoned project manager of many successful ventures and in a number of SIGs and conferences in which he is active. In spite of knowing Ron by correspondence over a long period of time it was only at JavaOne this year that we finally got together and I'm very glad we did.

Ron wrote to me after our meeting:

I told a number of people later at JavaOne, and even later that evening at the Software Engineering Management SIG, about xProcess. It really looks good. A question came up: It's a common technique in large organizations to keep a "Plan of Intent" and a "Plan of Record" - to have two project plans, one for the business partners and boss, one you actually execute to. Any support for that in xProcess?

Good question! Here's my reply...

There is support in xProcess for an arbitrary number of target levels through what we call (in the process definitions) P…

Understanding Cost of Delay and its Use in Kanban

Cost of Delay (CoD) is a vital concept to understand in product development. It should be a guide to the ordering of work items, even if - as is often the case - estimating it quantitatively may be difficult or even impossible. Analysing Cost of Delay (even if done qualitatively) is important because it focuses on the business value of work items and how that value changes over time. An understanding of Cost of Delay is essential if you want to maximise the flow of value to your customers.

Don Reinertsen in his book Flow [1] has shown that, if you want to deliver the maximum business value with a given size team, you give the highest priority, not to the most valuable work items in your "pool of ideas," not even to the most urgent items (those whose business value decays at the fastest rate), nor to your smallest items. Rather you should prioritise those items with the highest value of urgency (or CoD) divided by the time taken to implement them. Reinertsen called this appro…