In progress
This commit is contained in:
Yaojia Wang
697
reports/2025-11-03-Next-Sprint-Action-Plan.md
Normal file
697
reports/2025-11-03-Next-Sprint-Action-Plan.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,697 @@
|
||||
# ColaFlow Next Sprint Action Plan
|
||||
|
||||
**Plan Date**: 2025-11-03
|
||||
**Sprint Name**: M1 Sprint 2 - Authentication and Testing Completion
|
||||
**Sprint Goal**: Complete M1 critical path with authentication and comprehensive testing
|
||||
**Duration**: 2 weeks (2025-11-04 to 2025-11-15)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Sprint Overview
|
||||
|
||||
### Sprint Objectives
|
||||
|
||||
1. Implement JWT authentication system (critical blocker)
|
||||
2. Complete Application layer testing to 80% coverage
|
||||
3. Implement SignalR real-time notifications
|
||||
4. Polish and prepare for deployment
|
||||
|
||||
### Success Metrics
|
||||
|
||||
| Metric | Current | Target | Priority |
|
||||
|--------|---------|--------|----------|
|
||||
| M1 Completion | 83% | 100% | Critical |
|
||||
| Application Test Coverage | 40% | 80% | High |
|
||||
| Authentication | 0% | 100% | Critical |
|
||||
| SignalR Implementation | 0% | 100% | Medium |
|
||||
| Critical Bugs | 0 | 0 | Critical |
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Prioritized Task List
|
||||
|
||||
### Priority 1: Critical (Must Complete)
|
||||
|
||||
#### Task 1.1: JWT Authentication System
|
||||
|
||||
**Estimated Effort**: 7 days
|
||||
**Assigned To**: Backend Agent + Frontend Agent
|
||||
**Dependencies**: None (can start immediately)
|
||||
**Acceptance Criteria**:
|
||||
- User registration API working
|
||||
- Login API returning valid JWT tokens
|
||||
- All API endpoints protected with [Authorize]
|
||||
- Role-based authorization working (Admin, ProjectManager, Developer, Viewer)
|
||||
- Frontend login/logout UI functional
|
||||
- Token refresh mechanism working
|
||||
- 100% test coverage for authentication logic
|
||||
|
||||
**Detailed Subtasks**:
|
||||
|
||||
**Day 1: Architecture and Design** (Backend Agent + Architect Agent)
|
||||
- [ ] Research authentication approaches (ASP.NET Core Identity vs custom)
|
||||
- [ ] Design JWT token structure (claims, expiration, refresh strategy)
|
||||
- [ ] Define user roles and permissions matrix
|
||||
- [ ] Design database schema for users and roles
|
||||
- [ ] Document authentication flow (registration, login, refresh, logout)
|
||||
- [ ] Review security best practices (password hashing, token storage)
|
||||
|
||||
**Day 2: Database and Domain** (Backend Agent)
|
||||
- [ ] Create User aggregate root (Domain layer)
|
||||
- [ ] Create Role and Permission value objects
|
||||
- [ ] Add UserCreated, UserLoggedIn domain events
|
||||
- [ ] Create EF Core User configuration
|
||||
- [ ] Generate and apply authentication migration
|
||||
- [ ] Write User domain unit tests
|
||||
|
||||
**Day 3: Application Layer Commands** (Backend Agent)
|
||||
- [ ] Implement RegisterUserCommand + Handler + Validator
|
||||
- [ ] Implement LoginCommand + Handler + Validator
|
||||
- [ ] Implement RefreshTokenCommand + Handler + Validator
|
||||
- [ ] Implement ChangePasswordCommand + Handler + Validator
|
||||
- [ ] Add password hashing service (bcrypt or PBKDF2)
|
||||
- [ ] Write command handler tests
|
||||
|
||||
**Day 4: API Layer and Middleware** (Backend Agent)
|
||||
- [ ] Create AuthenticationController (register, login, refresh, logout)
|
||||
- [ ] Configure JWT authentication middleware
|
||||
- [ ] Add [Authorize] attributes to all existing controllers
|
||||
- [ ] Implement role-based authorization policies
|
||||
- [ ] Add authentication integration tests
|
||||
- [ ] Update API documentation
|
||||
|
||||
**Day 5: Frontend Authentication State** (Frontend Agent)
|
||||
- [ ] Create authentication context/store (Zustand)
|
||||
- [ ] Implement token storage (localStorage with encryption)
|
||||
- [ ] Add API client authentication interceptor
|
||||
- [ ] Implement token refresh logic
|
||||
- [ ] Add route guards for protected pages
|
||||
- [ ] Handle 401 unauthorized responses
|
||||
|
||||
**Day 6: Frontend UI Components** (Frontend Agent)
|
||||
- [ ] Create login page with form validation
|
||||
- [ ] Create registration page with form validation
|
||||
- [ ] Add user profile dropdown in navigation
|
||||
- [ ] Implement logout functionality
|
||||
- [ ] Add "Forgot Password" flow (basic)
|
||||
- [ ] Add role-based UI element visibility
|
||||
|
||||
**Day 7: Testing and Integration** (QA Agent + Backend Agent + Frontend Agent)
|
||||
- [ ] End-to-end authentication testing
|
||||
- [ ] Test protected route access
|
||||
- [ ] Test role-based authorization
|
||||
- [ ] Security testing (invalid tokens, expired tokens)
|
||||
- [ ] Test token refresh flow
|
||||
- [ ] Performance testing (token validation overhead)
|
||||
|
||||
**Risk Assessment**:
|
||||
- Risk: Authentication breaks existing functionality
|
||||
- Mitigation: Comprehensive integration tests, gradual rollout
|
||||
- Risk: Password security vulnerabilities
|
||||
- Mitigation: Use proven libraries (bcrypt), security review
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
#### Task 1.2: Complete Application Layer Testing
|
||||
|
||||
**Estimated Effort**: 3 days (parallel with authentication)
|
||||
**Assigned To**: QA Agent + Backend Agent
|
||||
**Dependencies**: None
|
||||
**Acceptance Criteria**:
|
||||
- Application layer test coverage ≥80%
|
||||
- All P2 Query Handler tests written (7 test files)
|
||||
- All P2 Command Handler tests written (2 test files)
|
||||
- Integration tests for all controllers (Testcontainers)
|
||||
- 100% test pass rate maintained
|
||||
|
||||
**Detailed Subtasks**:
|
||||
|
||||
**Day 1: Query Handler Tests** (QA Agent)
|
||||
- [ ] Write UpdateTaskCommandHandlerTests (3 test cases)
|
||||
- [ ] Write AssignTaskCommandHandlerTests (3 test cases)
|
||||
- [ ] Write GetStoriesByEpicIdQueryHandlerTests (2 test cases)
|
||||
- [ ] Write GetStoriesByProjectIdQueryHandlerTests (2 test cases)
|
||||
- [ ] All tests passing, coverage measured
|
||||
|
||||
**Day 2: Query Handler Tests (Continued)** (QA Agent)
|
||||
- [ ] Write GetTasksByStoryIdQueryHandlerTests (2 test cases)
|
||||
- [ ] Write GetTasksByProjectIdQueryHandlerTests (3 test cases)
|
||||
- [ ] Write GetTasksByAssigneeQueryHandlerTests (2 test cases)
|
||||
- [ ] Verify all Application layer commands and queries have tests
|
||||
- [ ] Run coverage report, identify remaining gaps
|
||||
|
||||
**Day 3: Integration Tests** (QA Agent + Backend Agent)
|
||||
- [ ] Set up Testcontainers for integration testing
|
||||
- [ ] Write ProjectsController integration tests (5 endpoints)
|
||||
- [ ] Write EpicsController integration tests (4 endpoints)
|
||||
- [ ] Write StoriesController integration tests (7 endpoints)
|
||||
- [ ] Write TasksController integration tests (8 endpoints)
|
||||
- [ ] Write AuthenticationController integration tests (when available)
|
||||
|
||||
**Risk Assessment**:
|
||||
- Risk: Test writing takes longer than estimated
|
||||
- Mitigation: Focus on P1 tests first, defer P3 if needed
|
||||
- Risk: Integration tests require complex setup
|
||||
- Mitigation: Use Testcontainers for clean database state
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Priority 2: High (Should Complete)
|
||||
|
||||
#### Task 2.1: SignalR Real-time Notifications
|
||||
|
||||
**Estimated Effort**: 3 days
|
||||
**Assigned To**: Backend Agent + Frontend Agent
|
||||
**Dependencies**: Authentication (should be implemented after JWT)
|
||||
**Acceptance Criteria**:
|
||||
- SignalR Hub configured and running
|
||||
- Task status changes broadcast to connected clients
|
||||
- Frontend receives and displays real-time updates
|
||||
- Kanban board updates automatically when other users make changes
|
||||
- Connection failure handling and reconnection logic
|
||||
- Performance tested with 10+ concurrent connections
|
||||
|
||||
**Detailed Subtasks**:
|
||||
|
||||
**Day 1: Backend SignalR Setup** (Backend Agent)
|
||||
- [ ] Install Microsoft.AspNetCore.SignalR package
|
||||
- [ ] Create ProjectHub for project-level events
|
||||
- [ ] Create TaskHub for task-level events
|
||||
- [ ] Configure SignalR in Program.cs
|
||||
- [ ] Add SignalR endpoint mapping
|
||||
- [ ] Integrate authentication with SignalR (JWT token in query string)
|
||||
- [ ] Write SignalR Hub unit tests
|
||||
|
||||
**Day 2: Backend Event Integration** (Backend Agent)
|
||||
- [ ] Add SignalR notification to UpdateTaskStatusCommandHandler
|
||||
- [ ] Add SignalR notification to CreateTaskCommandHandler
|
||||
- [ ] Add SignalR notification to UpdateTaskCommandHandler
|
||||
- [ ] Add SignalR notification to DeleteTaskCommandHandler
|
||||
- [ ] Define event message formats (JSON)
|
||||
- [ ] Test SignalR broadcasting with multiple connections
|
||||
|
||||
**Day 3: Frontend SignalR Integration** (Frontend Agent)
|
||||
- [ ] Install @microsoft/signalr package
|
||||
- [ ] Create SignalR connection management service
|
||||
- [ ] Implement auto-reconnection logic
|
||||
- [ ] Add SignalR listeners to Kanban board
|
||||
- [ ] Update TanStack Query cache on SignalR events
|
||||
- [ ] Add toast notifications for real-time updates
|
||||
- [ ] Handle connection status UI (connected, disconnected, reconnecting)
|
||||
|
||||
**Risk Assessment**:
|
||||
- Risk: SignalR connection issues in production
|
||||
- Mitigation: Robust reconnection logic, connection status monitoring
|
||||
- Risk: Performance impact with many connections
|
||||
- Mitigation: Performance testing, connection pooling
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
#### Task 2.2: API Documentation and Polish
|
||||
|
||||
**Estimated Effort**: 1 day
|
||||
**Assigned To**: Backend Agent
|
||||
**Dependencies**: None
|
||||
**Acceptance Criteria**:
|
||||
- All API endpoints documented in OpenAPI spec
|
||||
- Scalar documentation complete with examples
|
||||
- Request/response examples for all endpoints
|
||||
- Authentication flow documented
|
||||
- Error response formats documented
|
||||
|
||||
**Detailed Subtasks**:
|
||||
- [ ] Review all API endpoints for complete documentation
|
||||
- [ ] Add XML documentation comments to all controllers
|
||||
- [ ] Add example request/response bodies to OpenAPI spec
|
||||
- [ ] Document authentication flow in Scalar
|
||||
- [ ] Add error code reference documentation
|
||||
- [ ] Generate Postman/Insomnia collection
|
||||
- [ ] Update README with API usage examples
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Priority 3: Medium (Nice to Have)
|
||||
|
||||
#### Task 3.1: Frontend Component Tests
|
||||
|
||||
**Estimated Effort**: 2 days
|
||||
**Assigned To**: Frontend Agent + QA Agent
|
||||
**Dependencies**: None
|
||||
**Acceptance Criteria**:
|
||||
- Component test coverage ≥60%
|
||||
- Critical components have comprehensive tests
|
||||
- User interaction flows tested
|
||||
|
||||
**Detailed Subtasks**:
|
||||
- [ ] Set up React Testing Library
|
||||
- [ ] Write tests for authentication components (login, register)
|
||||
- [ ] Write tests for project list page
|
||||
- [ ] Write tests for Kanban board (without drag & drop)
|
||||
- [ ] Write tests for form components
|
||||
- [ ] Write tests for API error handling
|
||||
|
||||
**Risk Assessment**:
|
||||
- Risk: Time constraints may prevent completion
|
||||
- Mitigation: Defer to next sprint if Priority 1-2 tasks delayed
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
#### Task 3.2: Frontend Polish and UX Improvements
|
||||
|
||||
**Estimated Effort**: 2 days
|
||||
**Assigned To**: Frontend Agent + UX-UI Agent
|
||||
**Dependencies**: None
|
||||
**Acceptance Criteria**:
|
||||
- Responsive design on mobile devices
|
||||
- Loading states for all async operations
|
||||
- Error messages are clear and actionable
|
||||
- Accessibility audit passes WCAG AA
|
||||
|
||||
**Detailed Subtasks**:
|
||||
- [ ] Mobile responsive design audit
|
||||
- [ ] Add skeleton loaders for all loading states
|
||||
- [ ] Improve error message clarity
|
||||
- [ ] Add empty state designs
|
||||
- [ ] Accessibility audit (keyboard navigation, screen readers)
|
||||
- [ ] Add animations and transitions (subtle)
|
||||
- [ ] Performance optimization (code splitting, lazy loading)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
#### Task 3.3: Performance Optimization
|
||||
|
||||
**Estimated Effort**: 2 days
|
||||
**Assigned To**: Backend Agent
|
||||
**Dependencies**: None
|
||||
**Acceptance Criteria**:
|
||||
- API P95 response time <500ms
|
||||
- Database queries optimized with projections
|
||||
- Redis caching for frequently accessed data
|
||||
- Query performance tested under load
|
||||
|
||||
**Detailed Subtasks**:
|
||||
- [ ] Add Redis caching layer
|
||||
- [ ] Optimize EF Core queries with Select() projections
|
||||
- [ ] Add database indexes for common queries
|
||||
- [ ] Implement query result caching
|
||||
- [ ] Performance testing with load generation tool
|
||||
- [ ] Identify and fix N+1 query problems
|
||||
- [ ] Add response compression middleware
|
||||
|
||||
**Risk Assessment**:
|
||||
- Risk: Premature optimization
|
||||
- Mitigation: Only optimize if performance issues identified
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Task Assignment Matrix
|
||||
|
||||
| Task | Agent | Duration | Dependencies | Priority |
|
||||
|------|-------|----------|--------------|----------|
|
||||
| Auth Architecture | Backend + Architect | 1 day | None | P1 |
|
||||
| Auth Database | Backend | 1 day | Auth Architecture | P1 |
|
||||
| Auth Commands | Backend | 1 day | Auth Database | P1 |
|
||||
| Auth API | Backend | 1 day | Auth Commands | P1 |
|
||||
| Auth Frontend State | Frontend | 1 day | Auth API | P1 |
|
||||
| Auth Frontend UI | Frontend | 1 day | Auth Frontend State | P1 |
|
||||
| Auth Testing | QA + Backend + Frontend | 1 day | Auth Frontend UI | P1 |
|
||||
| Query Handler Tests | QA | 2 days | None | P1 |
|
||||
| Integration Tests | QA + Backend | 1 day | None | P1 |
|
||||
| SignalR Backend | Backend | 2 days | Auth API | P2 |
|
||||
| SignalR Frontend | Frontend | 1 day | SignalR Backend | P2 |
|
||||
| API Documentation | Backend | 1 day | Auth API | P2 |
|
||||
| Component Tests | Frontend + QA | 2 days | None | P3 |
|
||||
| Frontend Polish | Frontend + UX-UI | 2 days | None | P3 |
|
||||
| Performance Opt | Backend | 2 days | None | P3 |
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Sprint Schedule (2 Weeks)
|
||||
|
||||
### Week 1: Authentication and Testing
|
||||
|
||||
**Monday (Day 1)**:
|
||||
- Backend: Auth architecture design
|
||||
- QA: Start Query Handler tests (parallel)
|
||||
- Morning standup: Align on auth approach
|
||||
|
||||
**Tuesday (Day 2)**:
|
||||
- Backend: Auth database and domain
|
||||
- QA: Continue Query Handler tests
|
||||
- Evening: Review auth domain design
|
||||
|
||||
**Wednesday (Day 3)**:
|
||||
- Backend: Auth application commands
|
||||
- QA: Finish Query Handler tests, start integration tests
|
||||
- Evening: Demo auth commands working
|
||||
|
||||
**Thursday (Day 4)**:
|
||||
- Backend: Auth API layer and middleware
|
||||
- QA: Continue integration tests
|
||||
- Evening: Test auth API endpoints
|
||||
|
||||
**Friday (Day 5)**:
|
||||
- Frontend: Auth state management
|
||||
- Backend: Support frontend integration
|
||||
- QA: Auth integration testing
|
||||
- Evening: Weekly review, adjust plan if needed
|
||||
|
||||
### Week 2: Real-time and Polish
|
||||
|
||||
**Monday (Day 6)**:
|
||||
- Frontend: Auth UI components
|
||||
- Backend: Start SignalR backend setup
|
||||
- Morning: Sprint progress review
|
||||
|
||||
**Tuesday (Day 7)**:
|
||||
- QA + Backend + Frontend: End-to-end auth testing
|
||||
- Backend: Continue SignalR backend
|
||||
- Evening: Auth feature complete demo
|
||||
|
||||
**Wednesday (Day 8)**:
|
||||
- Backend: SignalR event integration
|
||||
- Frontend: Start SignalR frontend integration
|
||||
- Backend: API documentation
|
||||
|
||||
**Thursday (Day 9)**:
|
||||
- Frontend: Finish SignalR frontend integration
|
||||
- Frontend + QA: Start component tests (if time allows)
|
||||
- Evening: Real-time feature demo
|
||||
|
||||
**Friday (Day 10)**:
|
||||
- Frontend + UX-UI: Polish and UX improvements
|
||||
- QA: Final testing and bug fixes
|
||||
- Backend: Performance optimization (if time allows)
|
||||
- Afternoon: Sprint retrospective and M1 completion celebration
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Risk Management
|
||||
|
||||
### High Risks
|
||||
|
||||
**Risk 1: Authentication Implementation Complexity**
|
||||
- **Probability**: Medium
|
||||
- **Impact**: High (blocks deployment)
|
||||
- **Mitigation**:
|
||||
- Use proven libraries (ASP.NET Core Identity)
|
||||
- Follow security best practices documentation
|
||||
- Allocate buffer time (1-2 days)
|
||||
- Security review before completion
|
||||
|
||||
**Risk 2: Testing Takes Longer Than Estimated**
|
||||
- **Probability**: Medium
|
||||
- **Impact**: Medium (delays sprint)
|
||||
- **Mitigation**:
|
||||
- Focus on P1 critical tests first
|
||||
- Defer P3 nice-to-have tests if needed
|
||||
- QA agent can work in parallel
|
||||
|
||||
**Risk 3: SignalR Integration Issues**
|
||||
- **Probability**: Low
|
||||
- **Impact**: Medium (degrades UX)
|
||||
- **Mitigation**:
|
||||
- Can defer to next sprint if needed
|
||||
- Not critical for M1 MVP
|
||||
- Allocate extra day if problems arise
|
||||
|
||||
### Medium Risks
|
||||
|
||||
**Risk 4: Frontend-Backend Integration Issues**
|
||||
- **Probability**: Low
|
||||
- **Impact**: Medium
|
||||
- **Mitigation**:
|
||||
- Daily integration testing
|
||||
- Clear API contract documentation
|
||||
- Quick feedback loops
|
||||
|
||||
**Risk 5: Performance Bottlenecks**
|
||||
- **Probability**: Low
|
||||
- **Impact**: Low (current performance acceptable)
|
||||
- **Mitigation**:
|
||||
- Performance optimization is P3 (optional)
|
||||
- Can be addressed in next sprint
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Communication Plan
|
||||
|
||||
### Daily Standups
|
||||
|
||||
**Time**: 9:00 AM daily
|
||||
**Participants**: All agents
|
||||
**Format**:
|
||||
1. What did you complete yesterday?
|
||||
2. What will you work on today?
|
||||
3. Any blockers or dependencies?
|
||||
|
||||
### Mid-Sprint Review
|
||||
|
||||
**Time**: Friday, Week 1 (Day 5)
|
||||
**Participants**: All agents + Product Manager
|
||||
**Agenda**:
|
||||
1. Review sprint progress (actual vs planned)
|
||||
2. Demo completed features (authentication)
|
||||
3. Identify risks and adjust plan if needed
|
||||
4. Confirm Week 2 priorities
|
||||
|
||||
### Sprint Retrospective
|
||||
|
||||
**Time**: Friday, Week 2 (Day 10)
|
||||
**Participants**: All agents + Product Manager
|
||||
**Agenda**:
|
||||
1. Review sprint achievements
|
||||
2. Discuss what went well
|
||||
3. Discuss what could be improved
|
||||
4. Identify action items for next sprint
|
||||
5. Celebrate M1 completion
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Definition of Done
|
||||
|
||||
### Sprint Definition of Done
|
||||
|
||||
**Feature Level**:
|
||||
- [ ] Code implemented and peer-reviewed
|
||||
- [ ] Unit tests written and passing
|
||||
- [ ] Integration tests written and passing
|
||||
- [ ] API documentation updated
|
||||
- [ ] Frontend UI implemented (if applicable)
|
||||
- [ ] Manual testing completed
|
||||
- [ ] No critical bugs
|
||||
|
||||
**Sprint Level**:
|
||||
- [ ] All Priority 1 tasks completed
|
||||
- [ ] At least 80% of Priority 2 tasks completed
|
||||
- [ ] M1 completion ≥95%
|
||||
- [ ] Test coverage ≥80% (Application layer)
|
||||
- [ ] All tests passing (100% pass rate)
|
||||
- [ ] Build with zero errors and warnings
|
||||
- [ ] Sprint retrospective completed
|
||||
|
||||
### M1 Milestone Definition of Done
|
||||
|
||||
**Functional Requirements**:
|
||||
- [x] Complete CRUD for Projects, Epics, Stories, Tasks
|
||||
- [x] Kanban board with drag & drop
|
||||
- [ ] User authentication and authorization
|
||||
- [ ] Real-time updates with SignalR
|
||||
- [ ] Audit logging for all operations (with user context)
|
||||
|
||||
**Quality Requirements**:
|
||||
- [x] Domain layer test coverage ≥80% (96.98% achieved)
|
||||
- [ ] Application layer test coverage ≥80%
|
||||
- [ ] Integration tests for all API endpoints
|
||||
- [x] Zero critical bugs
|
||||
- [x] Build with zero errors and warnings
|
||||
|
||||
**Documentation Requirements**:
|
||||
- [x] API documentation (Scalar)
|
||||
- [x] Architecture documentation
|
||||
- [ ] User guide (basic)
|
||||
- [ ] Deployment guide
|
||||
|
||||
**Deployment Requirements**:
|
||||
- [x] Docker containerization
|
||||
- [ ] Environment configuration
|
||||
- [ ] Database migrations (including auth tables)
|
||||
- [ ] CI/CD pipeline (basic)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Success Criteria
|
||||
|
||||
### Sprint Success
|
||||
|
||||
**Must Achieve (Minimum Viable Sprint)**:
|
||||
1. JWT authentication fully working
|
||||
2. All API endpoints secured
|
||||
3. Application layer test coverage ≥75%
|
||||
4. Zero critical bugs
|
||||
|
||||
**Target Achievement (Successful Sprint)**:
|
||||
1. JWT authentication fully working
|
||||
2. Application layer test coverage ≥80%
|
||||
3. SignalR real-time updates working
|
||||
4. Integration tests for all controllers
|
||||
5. M1 completion ≥95%
|
||||
|
||||
**Stretch Goals (Exceptional Sprint)**:
|
||||
1. All of the above PLUS:
|
||||
2. Frontend component tests ≥60% coverage
|
||||
3. Performance optimization complete
|
||||
4. M1 completion 100%
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Budget and Resource Allocation
|
||||
|
||||
### Time Allocation (10 days, 80 hours total)
|
||||
|
||||
| Priority | Category | Hours | Percentage |
|
||||
|----------|----------|-------|------------|
|
||||
| P1 | Authentication | 56h (7 days) | 70% |
|
||||
| P1 | Application Testing | 24h (3 days) | 30% |
|
||||
| P2 | SignalR | 24h (3 days) | 30% |
|
||||
| P2 | Documentation | 8h (1 day) | 10% |
|
||||
| P3 | Component Tests | 16h (2 days) | 20% |
|
||||
| P3 | Polish | 16h (2 days) | 20% |
|
||||
| P3 | Performance | 16h (2 days) | 20% |
|
||||
|
||||
**Note**: P2 and P3 tasks are flexible and can be adjusted based on P1 progress
|
||||
|
||||
### Resource Requirements
|
||||
|
||||
**Development Tools** (already available):
|
||||
- .NET 9 SDK
|
||||
- Node.js 20+
|
||||
- PostgreSQL 16 (Docker)
|
||||
- Redis 7 (Docker - to be added)
|
||||
- Visual Studio Code / Visual Studio
|
||||
|
||||
**Infrastructure** (already available):
|
||||
- GitHub repository
|
||||
- Docker Desktop
|
||||
- Development machines
|
||||
|
||||
**No additional budget required for this sprint**
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Appendix
|
||||
|
||||
### A. Authentication Flow Diagram
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
Registration Flow:
|
||||
User → Frontend (Registration Form) → API (RegisterUserCommand)
|
||||
→ Domain (User.Create) → Database → Response (User Created)
|
||||
|
||||
Login Flow:
|
||||
User → Frontend (Login Form) → API (LoginCommand)
|
||||
→ Verify Password → Generate JWT Token → Response (Token)
|
||||
→ Frontend (Store Token) → API (Subsequent Requests with Bearer Token)
|
||||
|
||||
Protected API Request:
|
||||
User → Frontend (With Token) → API (JWT Middleware validates token)
|
||||
→ Authorized → Controller → Response
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### B. Test Coverage Target Breakdown
|
||||
|
||||
| Layer | Current Coverage | Target Coverage | Gap | Priority |
|
||||
|-------|-----------------|-----------------|-----|----------|
|
||||
| Domain | 96.98% | 80% | +16.98% | ✅ Complete |
|
||||
| Application | 40% | 80% | -40% | 🔴 Critical |
|
||||
| Infrastructure | 0% | 60% | -60% | 🟡 Medium |
|
||||
| API | 0% | 70% | -70% | 🟡 Medium |
|
||||
| Frontend | 0% | 60% | -60% | 🟢 Low |
|
||||
|
||||
**Focus for this sprint**: Application layer (P1), API layer (P2)
|
||||
|
||||
### C. API Endpoints to Secure
|
||||
|
||||
**Projects** (5 endpoints):
|
||||
- POST /api/v1/projects - [Authorize(Roles = "Admin,ProjectManager")]
|
||||
- GET /api/v1/projects - [Authorize]
|
||||
- GET /api/v1/projects/{id} - [Authorize]
|
||||
- PUT /api/v1/projects/{id} - [Authorize(Roles = "Admin,ProjectManager")]
|
||||
- DELETE /api/v1/projects/{id} - [Authorize(Roles = "Admin")]
|
||||
|
||||
**Epics** (4 endpoints):
|
||||
- All require [Authorize(Roles = "Admin,ProjectManager,Developer")]
|
||||
|
||||
**Stories** (7 endpoints):
|
||||
- All require [Authorize]
|
||||
|
||||
**Tasks** (8 endpoints):
|
||||
- All require [Authorize]
|
||||
|
||||
### D. Key Decisions Pending
|
||||
|
||||
**Decision 1**: ASP.NET Core Identity vs Custom User Management
|
||||
- **Options**:
|
||||
1. Use ASP.NET Core Identity (full-featured, battle-tested)
|
||||
2. Custom implementation (lightweight, full control)
|
||||
- **Recommendation**: ASP.NET Core Identity (faster, more secure)
|
||||
- **Decision Maker**: Backend Agent + Architect Agent
|
||||
- **Timeline**: Day 1 of sprint
|
||||
|
||||
**Decision 2**: Token Refresh Strategy
|
||||
- **Options**:
|
||||
1. Sliding expiration (token refreshes automatically)
|
||||
2. Refresh token (separate refresh token with longer expiration)
|
||||
3. No refresh (user must re-login)
|
||||
- **Recommendation**: Refresh token approach (more secure)
|
||||
- **Decision Maker**: Backend Agent + Architect Agent
|
||||
- **Timeline**: Day 1 of sprint
|
||||
|
||||
**Decision 3**: Password Policy
|
||||
- **Options**:
|
||||
1. Strict (12+ chars, special chars, numbers)
|
||||
2. Moderate (8+ chars, letters + numbers)
|
||||
3. Minimal (6+ chars)
|
||||
- **Recommendation**: Moderate (balance security and UX)
|
||||
- **Decision Maker**: Product Manager + Backend Agent
|
||||
- **Timeline**: Day 1 of sprint
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Next Steps After This Sprint
|
||||
|
||||
### Immediate (Week 3)
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Deployment Preparation**:
|
||||
- Set up staging environment
|
||||
- Configure CI/CD pipeline
|
||||
- Prepare deployment documentation
|
||||
- Security audit
|
||||
|
||||
2. **M1 Completion and Handoff**:
|
||||
- Final testing and bug fixes
|
||||
- User acceptance testing
|
||||
- Documentation completion
|
||||
- M1 retrospective
|
||||
|
||||
### M2 Planning (Week 4)
|
||||
|
||||
1. **MCP Server Research**:
|
||||
- Research MCP protocol specification
|
||||
- Analyze MCP Server implementation patterns
|
||||
- Design ColaFlow MCP Server architecture
|
||||
- Prototype diff preview mechanism
|
||||
|
||||
2. **M2 Sprint 1 Planning**:
|
||||
- Break down M2 into epics and stories
|
||||
- Estimate effort for MCP implementation
|
||||
- Plan first M2 sprint (2-3 weeks)
|
||||
- Allocate resources
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
**End of Action Plan**
|
||||
|
||||
**Created By**: Product Manager
|
||||
**Last Updated**: 2025-11-03
|
||||
**Next Review**: 2025-11-10 (Mid-Sprint Review)
|
||||
707
reports/2025-11-03-Project-Status-Report.md
Normal file
707
reports/2025-11-03-Project-Status-Report.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,707 @@
|
||||
# ColaFlow Project Status Report
|
||||
|
||||
**Report Date**: 2025-11-03
|
||||
**Report Type**: Milestone Review and Strategic Planning
|
||||
**Prepared By**: Product Manager
|
||||
**Reporting Period**: M1 Sprint 1 (2025-11-01 to 2025-11-03)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Executive Summary
|
||||
|
||||
ColaFlow project has made exceptional progress in M1 development, achieving 83% completion in just 3 days of intensive development. The team has successfully delivered core CRUD APIs, complete frontend UI, and established a robust testing framework. A critical QA session identified and resolved a high-severity bug, demonstrating the effectiveness of our quality assurance processes.
|
||||
|
||||
### Key Highlights
|
||||
|
||||
- **M1 Progress**: 15/18 tasks completed (83%)
|
||||
- **Code Quality**: 233 tests passing (100% pass rate), 96.98% domain coverage
|
||||
- **Critical Achievement**: Full Epic/Story/Task management with Kanban board
|
||||
- **Quality Milestone**: Fixed critical UpdateTaskStatus bug, added 31 comprehensive tests
|
||||
- **Technical Debt**: Minimal, proactive testing improvements identified
|
||||
|
||||
### Status Dashboard
|
||||
|
||||
| Metric | Current | Target | Status |
|
||||
|--------|---------|--------|--------|
|
||||
| M1 Completion | 83% | 100% | 🟢 Ahead of Schedule |
|
||||
| Test Coverage (Domain) | 96.98% | 80% | 🟢 Exceeded |
|
||||
| Test Coverage (Application) | ~40% | 80% | 🟡 In Progress |
|
||||
| Test Pass Rate | 100% | 95% | 🟢 Excellent |
|
||||
| Critical Bugs | 0 | 0 | 🟢 Clean |
|
||||
| Build Quality | 0 errors, 0 warnings | 0 errors | 🟢 Perfect |
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Detailed Progress Analysis
|
||||
|
||||
### 1. M1 Milestone Status (83% Complete)
|
||||
|
||||
#### Completed Tasks (15/18)
|
||||
|
||||
**Infrastructure & Architecture** (5/5 - 100%):
|
||||
- ✅ Clean Architecture four-layer structure
|
||||
- ✅ DDD tactical patterns implementation
|
||||
- ✅ CQRS with MediatR 13.1.0
|
||||
- ✅ EF Core 9 + PostgreSQL 16 integration
|
||||
- ✅ Docker containerization
|
||||
|
||||
**Domain Layer** (5/5 - 100%):
|
||||
- ✅ Project/Epic/Story/Task aggregate roots
|
||||
- ✅ Value objects (ProjectId, ProjectKey, Enumerations)
|
||||
- ✅ Domain events and business rules
|
||||
- ✅ 192 unit tests (96.98% coverage)
|
||||
- ✅ FluentValidation integration
|
||||
|
||||
**API Layer** (5/5 - 100%):
|
||||
- ✅ 23 RESTful endpoints across 4 controllers
|
||||
- ✅ Projects CRUD (5 endpoints)
|
||||
- ✅ Epics CRUD (4 endpoints)
|
||||
- ✅ Stories CRUD (7 endpoints)
|
||||
- ✅ Tasks CRUD (8 endpoints including UpdateTaskStatus)
|
||||
|
||||
**Frontend Layer** (5/5 - 100%):
|
||||
- ✅ Next.js 16 + React 19 project structure
|
||||
- ✅ 7 functional pages with TanStack Query integration
|
||||
- ✅ Epic/Story/Task management UI
|
||||
- ✅ Kanban board with @dnd-kit drag & drop
|
||||
- ✅ Complete CRUD operations with optimistic updates
|
||||
|
||||
**Quality Assurance** (3/5 - 60%):
|
||||
- ✅ 233 unit tests (Domain: 192, Application: 32, Architecture: 8, Integration: 1)
|
||||
- ✅ Critical bug fix (UpdateTaskStatus 500 error)
|
||||
- ✅ Enhanced Enumeration matching with space normalization
|
||||
- ⏳ Integration tests pending
|
||||
- ⏳ Frontend component tests pending
|
||||
|
||||
#### Remaining Tasks (3/18)
|
||||
|
||||
**1. Complete Application Layer Testing** (Priority: High):
|
||||
- Current: 32 tests (~40% coverage)
|
||||
- Target: 80% coverage
|
||||
- Remaining work:
|
||||
- 7 P2 Query Handler tests
|
||||
- API integration tests (Testcontainers)
|
||||
- Performance testing
|
||||
- Estimated effort: 3-4 days
|
||||
|
||||
**2. JWT Authentication System** (Priority: Critical):
|
||||
- Scope:
|
||||
- User registration/login API
|
||||
- JWT token generation and validation
|
||||
- Authentication middleware
|
||||
- Role-based authorization
|
||||
- Frontend login/logout UI
|
||||
- Protected routes
|
||||
- Estimated effort: 5-7 days
|
||||
- Dependencies: None (can start immediately)
|
||||
|
||||
**3. SignalR Real-time Notifications** (Priority: Medium):
|
||||
- Scope:
|
||||
- SignalR Hub configuration
|
||||
- Kanban board real-time updates
|
||||
- Task status change notifications
|
||||
- Frontend SignalR client integration
|
||||
- Estimated effort: 3-4 days
|
||||
- Dependencies: Authentication system (should be implemented after JWT)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Technical Achievements
|
||||
|
||||
### 1. Backend Architecture Excellence
|
||||
|
||||
**Clean Architecture Implementation**:
|
||||
- Four-layer separation: Domain, Application, Infrastructure, API
|
||||
- Zero coupling violations (verified by architecture tests)
|
||||
- CQRS pattern with 31 commands and 12 queries
|
||||
- Domain-driven design with 4 aggregate roots
|
||||
|
||||
**Code Quality Metrics**:
|
||||
```
|
||||
Build Status: 0 errors, 0 warnings
|
||||
Domain Coverage: 96.98% (442/516 lines)
|
||||
Test Pass Rate: 100% (233/233 tests)
|
||||
Architecture Tests: 8/8 passing
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Technology Stack**:
|
||||
- .NET 9 with C# 13
|
||||
- MediatR 13.1.0 (commercial license)
|
||||
- AutoMapper 15.1.0 (commercial license)
|
||||
- EF Core 9 + PostgreSQL 16
|
||||
- FluentValidation 12.0.0
|
||||
|
||||
### 2. Frontend Architecture Excellence
|
||||
|
||||
**Modern Stack**:
|
||||
- Next.js 16.0.1 with App Router
|
||||
- React 19.2.0 with TypeScript 5
|
||||
- TanStack Query v5.90.6 (server state)
|
||||
- Zustand 5.0.8 (client state)
|
||||
- shadcn/ui + Tailwind CSS 4
|
||||
|
||||
**Features Delivered**:
|
||||
- 7 responsive pages with consistent design
|
||||
- Complete CRUD operations with optimistic updates
|
||||
- Drag & drop Kanban board (@dnd-kit)
|
||||
- Form validation (React Hook Form + Zod)
|
||||
- Error handling and loading states
|
||||
|
||||
### 3. Critical QA Achievement
|
||||
|
||||
**Bug Discovery and Fix** (2025-11-03):
|
||||
|
||||
**Problem**: UpdateTaskStatus API returned 500 error when updating task status to "InProgress"
|
||||
|
||||
**Root Cause**:
|
||||
1. Enumeration matching used exact string match, failed on "InProgress" vs "In Progress"
|
||||
2. Business rule validation used unsafe string comparison instead of enumeration comparison
|
||||
|
||||
**Solution**:
|
||||
1. Enhanced `Enumeration.FromDisplayName()` with space normalization fallback
|
||||
2. Fixed `UpdateTaskStatusCommandHandler` to use type-safe enumeration comparison
|
||||
3. Created 10 comprehensive test cases for all status transitions
|
||||
|
||||
**Impact**:
|
||||
- Critical feature (Kanban drag & drop) now fully functional
|
||||
- Improved API robustness with flexible input handling
|
||||
- Enhanced type safety in business rules
|
||||
- Zero regression (100% test pass rate maintained)
|
||||
|
||||
**Test Coverage Enhancement**:
|
||||
- Before: 202 tests (1 Application test)
|
||||
- After: 233 tests (32 Application tests)
|
||||
- Increase: +15% test count, +40x Application layer coverage
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Risk Assessment and Mitigation
|
||||
|
||||
### Current Risks
|
||||
|
||||
#### 1. Application Layer Test Coverage Gap (Medium Risk)
|
||||
|
||||
**Description**: Application layer coverage at 40% vs 80% target
|
||||
|
||||
**Impact**:
|
||||
- Potential undetected bugs in command/query handlers
|
||||
- Reduced confidence in API reliability
|
||||
- Slower bug detection cycle
|
||||
|
||||
**Mitigation Strategy**:
|
||||
- Priority 1: Complete remaining 7 P2 test files (3-4 days)
|
||||
- Add integration tests for all API endpoints (Testcontainers)
|
||||
- Implement CI/CD coverage gates (min 80% threshold)
|
||||
|
||||
**Timeline**: Complete within 1 week
|
||||
|
||||
#### 2. No Authentication System (High Risk)
|
||||
|
||||
**Description**: API endpoints are completely unsecured
|
||||
|
||||
**Impact**:
|
||||
- Cannot deploy to any environment (even internal testing)
|
||||
- No user context for audit logging
|
||||
- No role-based access control
|
||||
|
||||
**Mitigation Strategy**:
|
||||
- Immediate start on JWT authentication implementation
|
||||
- Design authentication architecture (1 day)
|
||||
- Implement backend auth system (3 days)
|
||||
- Implement frontend login UI (2 days)
|
||||
- Testing and integration (1 day)
|
||||
|
||||
**Timeline**: Complete within 7 days (highest priority)
|
||||
|
||||
#### 3. No Real-time Updates (Low Risk)
|
||||
|
||||
**Description**: Users must refresh to see task updates
|
||||
|
||||
**Impact**:
|
||||
- Poor user experience in collaborative scenarios
|
||||
- Not critical for MVP but important for UX
|
||||
|
||||
**Mitigation Strategy**:
|
||||
- Implement after authentication system
|
||||
- SignalR Hub setup (2 days)
|
||||
- Frontend integration (1 day)
|
||||
|
||||
**Timeline**: Complete within 2 weeks
|
||||
|
||||
### Technical Debt
|
||||
|
||||
**Current Technical Debt**: Minimal and manageable
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Missing Integration Tests** (Priority: High)
|
||||
- Effort: 2-3 days
|
||||
- Impact: Medium (testing confidence)
|
||||
|
||||
2. **No Frontend Component Tests** (Priority: Medium)
|
||||
- Effort: 3-4 days
|
||||
- Impact: Medium (UI reliability)
|
||||
|
||||
3. **No Performance Optimization** (Priority: Low)
|
||||
- Effort: 2-3 days
|
||||
- Impact: Low (current performance acceptable)
|
||||
|
||||
4. **No Redis Caching** (Priority: Low)
|
||||
- Effort: 1-2 days
|
||||
- Impact: Low (premature optimization)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Key Performance Indicators (KPIs)
|
||||
|
||||
### Development Velocity
|
||||
|
||||
| Metric | Current | Trend |
|
||||
|--------|---------|-------|
|
||||
| Story Points Completed | 45/54 (83%) | ↑ Excellent |
|
||||
| Features Delivered | 15/18 | ↑ On Track |
|
||||
| Days to Complete M1 Sprint 1 | 3 days | ↑ Ahead of Schedule |
|
||||
| Average Tests per Feature | 15.5 | ↑ High Quality |
|
||||
|
||||
### Quality Metrics
|
||||
|
||||
| Metric | Current | Target | Status |
|
||||
|--------|---------|--------|--------|
|
||||
| Test Pass Rate | 100% | ≥95% | 🟢 Excellent |
|
||||
| Code Coverage (Domain) | 96.98% | ≥80% | 🟢 Exceeded |
|
||||
| Code Coverage (Application) | ~40% | ≥80% | 🟡 In Progress |
|
||||
| Build Errors | 0 | 0 | 🟢 Perfect |
|
||||
| Build Warnings | 0 | <5 | 🟢 Perfect |
|
||||
| Critical Bugs | 0 | 0 | 🟢 Clean |
|
||||
|
||||
### Team Productivity
|
||||
|
||||
| Metric | Value |
|
||||
|--------|-------|
|
||||
| Backend Files Created | 80+ files |
|
||||
| Frontend Files Created | 33+ files |
|
||||
| API Endpoints Delivered | 23 endpoints |
|
||||
| UI Pages Delivered | 7 pages |
|
||||
| Tests Written | 233 tests |
|
||||
| Bug Fix Time (Critical) | 4 hours |
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Stakeholder Communication
|
||||
|
||||
### Achievements to Highlight
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Rapid Development**: 83% M1 completion in 3 days
|
||||
2. **High Quality**: 96.98% test coverage, zero critical bugs
|
||||
3. **Modern Stack**: Latest technologies (Next.js 16, React 19, .NET 9)
|
||||
4. **Full-Stack Delivery**: Complete API + UI with Kanban board
|
||||
5. **Proactive QA**: Critical bug identified and fixed before user impact
|
||||
|
||||
### Concerns to Address
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Authentication Gap**: Highest priority, starting immediately
|
||||
2. **Test Coverage**: Application layer needs improvement, plan in place
|
||||
3. **Deployment Readiness**: Cannot deploy until authentication complete
|
||||
|
||||
### Next Milestone Preview (M2)
|
||||
|
||||
**M2 Goal**: MCP Server Implementation (Months 3-4)
|
||||
**Scope**:
|
||||
- Basic MCP Resources (projects.search, issues.search)
|
||||
- Basic MCP Tools (create_issue, update_status)
|
||||
- Diff preview mechanism for AI operations
|
||||
- AI integration testing
|
||||
|
||||
**Preparation Activities** (can start during M1 completion):
|
||||
- Research MCP protocol specification
|
||||
- Design MCP Server architecture
|
||||
- Prototype diff preview UI
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Financial and Resource Considerations
|
||||
|
||||
### License Costs
|
||||
|
||||
**Current Commercial Licenses**:
|
||||
- MediatR 13.1.0: LuckyPennySoftware license (valid until Nov 2026)
|
||||
- AutoMapper 15.1.0: LuckyPennySoftware license (valid until Nov 2026)
|
||||
- **Status**: ✅ Paid and configured
|
||||
|
||||
### Infrastructure Costs
|
||||
|
||||
**Development Environment**:
|
||||
- PostgreSQL 16 (Docker): Free
|
||||
- Redis 7 (Docker): Free
|
||||
- Development tools: Free
|
||||
- **Status**: ✅ Zero cost
|
||||
|
||||
**Future Production Costs** (estimated):
|
||||
- PostgreSQL managed service: $50-100/month
|
||||
- Redis managed service: $30-50/month
|
||||
- Hosting (Azure/AWS): $100-200/month
|
||||
- **Total Estimated**: $180-350/month
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Strategic Recommendations
|
||||
|
||||
### Recommendation 1: Complete M1 Before Starting M2 (STRONGLY RECOMMENDED)
|
||||
|
||||
**Rationale**:
|
||||
- M1 is 83% complete, only 3 tasks remaining
|
||||
- Authentication is critical blocker for any deployment
|
||||
- Solid foundation needed before MCP complexity
|
||||
- Testing gaps create technical debt if left unaddressed
|
||||
|
||||
**Proposed Timeline**:
|
||||
- Week 1: JWT Authentication (7 days)
|
||||
- Week 2: Complete Application testing + SignalR (7 days)
|
||||
- Week 3: Buffer for polish and bug fixes (3 days)
|
||||
- **Total**: 17 days to 100% M1 completion
|
||||
|
||||
**Benefits**:
|
||||
- Clean milestone completion
|
||||
- Deployable MVP
|
||||
- Reduced technical debt
|
||||
- Strong foundation for M2
|
||||
|
||||
### Recommendation 2: Prioritize Security (CRITICAL)
|
||||
|
||||
**Action Items**:
|
||||
1. Start JWT authentication immediately (highest priority)
|
||||
2. Add API endpoint authorization checks
|
||||
3. Implement role-based access control (Admin, ProjectManager, Developer, Viewer)
|
||||
4. Add audit logging for all write operations
|
||||
5. Security review before any deployment
|
||||
|
||||
**Timeline**: 7 days for basic security, 3 days for advanced features
|
||||
|
||||
### Recommendation 3: Establish CI/CD Pipeline (HIGH PRIORITY)
|
||||
|
||||
**Rationale**:
|
||||
- Manual testing is time-consuming and error-prone
|
||||
- Critical bug was caught during manual testing, should be automated
|
||||
- Coverage gaps should be prevented by pipeline checks
|
||||
|
||||
**Implementation**:
|
||||
1. GitHub Actions workflow for build and test
|
||||
2. Automated test coverage reporting
|
||||
3. Coverage gates (min 80% for new code)
|
||||
4. Automated deployment to staging environment
|
||||
|
||||
**Estimated Effort**: 2 days
|
||||
**ROI**: Prevents bugs, faster feedback, better quality
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Decision Framework
|
||||
|
||||
### Option A: Complete M1 (100%) - RECOMMENDED ✅
|
||||
|
||||
**Scope**:
|
||||
1. Implement JWT Authentication (7 days)
|
||||
2. Complete Application layer testing (3 days)
|
||||
3. Implement SignalR real-time updates (3 days)
|
||||
4. Polish and bug fixes (2 days)
|
||||
|
||||
**Total Timeline**: 15 days (3 weeks)
|
||||
|
||||
**Pros**:
|
||||
- Clean milestone completion
|
||||
- Deployable MVP
|
||||
- Strong foundation for M2
|
||||
- Minimal technical debt
|
||||
- Can demonstrate to stakeholders
|
||||
|
||||
**Cons**:
|
||||
- Delays M2 start by 3 weeks
|
||||
- No immediate AI features
|
||||
|
||||
**Recommendation**: STRONGLY RECOMMENDED
|
||||
- Security is non-negotiable
|
||||
- Testing gaps create future problems
|
||||
- Clean foundation prevents rework
|
||||
|
||||
### Option B: Start M2 Immediately - NOT RECOMMENDED ❌
|
||||
|
||||
**Scope**:
|
||||
1. Begin MCP Server research and design
|
||||
2. Leave authentication for later
|
||||
3. Focus on AI integration features
|
||||
|
||||
**Pros**:
|
||||
- Faster progress toward AI features
|
||||
- Early validation of MCP concepts
|
||||
|
||||
**Cons**:
|
||||
- Cannot deploy anywhere (no authentication)
|
||||
- Accumulates technical debt
|
||||
- MCP work may require architecture changes
|
||||
- Risk of rework if foundation is weak
|
||||
- Testing gaps will compound
|
||||
|
||||
**Recommendation**: NOT RECOMMENDED
|
||||
- High technical and security risk
|
||||
- Will slow down overall progress
|
||||
- May require significant rework later
|
||||
|
||||
### Option C: Hybrid Approach - CONDITIONAL ⚠️
|
||||
|
||||
**Scope**:
|
||||
1. Implement authentication (7 days) - MUST DO
|
||||
2. Start M2 research in parallel (2 days)
|
||||
3. Defer SignalR to M2 (acceptable)
|
||||
4. Complete critical testing (3 days)
|
||||
|
||||
**Pros**:
|
||||
- Addresses critical security gap
|
||||
- Begins M2 preparation
|
||||
- Pragmatic compromise
|
||||
|
||||
**Cons**:
|
||||
- Split focus may reduce quality
|
||||
- Still leaves some M1 work incomplete
|
||||
- Requires careful coordination
|
||||
|
||||
**Recommendation**: ACCEPTABLE IF TIMELINE IS CRITICAL
|
||||
- Authentication is non-negotiable
|
||||
- M2 research can happen in parallel
|
||||
- Must complete critical testing
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Next Sprint Planning
|
||||
|
||||
### Sprint Goal: Complete M1 Critical Path
|
||||
|
||||
**Duration**: 2 weeks (10 working days)
|
||||
**Start Date**: 2025-11-04
|
||||
**End Date**: 2025-11-15
|
||||
|
||||
### Sprint Backlog (Prioritized)
|
||||
|
||||
#### Week 1: Authentication and Critical Testing
|
||||
|
||||
**Priority 1: JWT Authentication System** (7 days):
|
||||
|
||||
Day 1-2: Architecture and Design
|
||||
- [ ] Design authentication architecture
|
||||
- [ ] Choose identity framework (ASP.NET Core Identity vs custom)
|
||||
- [ ] Design JWT token structure and claims
|
||||
- [ ] Define user roles and permissions
|
||||
- [ ] Design API authentication flow
|
||||
|
||||
Day 3-4: Backend Implementation
|
||||
- [ ] Implement user registration API
|
||||
- [ ] Implement login API with JWT generation
|
||||
- [ ] Add JWT validation middleware
|
||||
- [ ] Secure all API endpoints with [Authorize]
|
||||
- [ ] Implement role-based authorization
|
||||
- [ ] Add password hashing and validation
|
||||
|
||||
Day 5-6: Frontend Implementation
|
||||
- [ ] Create login/registration UI
|
||||
- [ ] Implement authentication state management
|
||||
- [ ] Add protected route guards
|
||||
- [ ] Handle token refresh
|
||||
- [ ] Add logout functionality
|
||||
|
||||
Day 7: Testing and Integration
|
||||
- [ ] Write authentication unit tests
|
||||
- [ ] Write authentication integration tests
|
||||
- [ ] Test role-based access control
|
||||
- [ ] End-to-end authentication testing
|
||||
|
||||
**Priority 2: Complete Application Testing** (3 days - parallel):
|
||||
|
||||
Day 1-2: Query Handler Tests
|
||||
- [ ] GetStoriesByEpicIdQueryHandlerTests
|
||||
- [ ] GetStoriesByProjectIdQueryHandlerTests
|
||||
- [ ] GetTasksByStoryIdQueryHandlerTests
|
||||
- [ ] GetTasksByProjectIdQueryHandlerTests
|
||||
- [ ] GetTasksByAssigneeQueryHandlerTests
|
||||
|
||||
Day 2-3: Command Handler Tests
|
||||
- [ ] UpdateTaskCommandHandlerTests
|
||||
- [ ] AssignTaskCommandHandlerTests
|
||||
|
||||
Day 3: Integration Tests
|
||||
- [ ] API integration tests with Testcontainers
|
||||
- [ ] End-to-end CRUD workflow tests
|
||||
|
||||
#### Week 2: Real-time Updates and Polish
|
||||
|
||||
**Priority 3: SignalR Real-time Notifications** (3 days):
|
||||
|
||||
Day 1: Backend Setup
|
||||
- [ ] Configure SignalR hubs
|
||||
- [ ] Implement TaskStatusChangedHub
|
||||
- [ ] Add notification logic to command handlers
|
||||
- [ ] Test SignalR connection and messaging
|
||||
|
||||
Day 2: Frontend Integration
|
||||
- [ ] Install SignalR client library
|
||||
- [ ] Implement SignalR connection management
|
||||
- [ ] Add real-time update listeners to Kanban board
|
||||
- [ ] Add notification toast components
|
||||
|
||||
Day 3: Testing and Polish
|
||||
- [ ] Test real-time updates across multiple clients
|
||||
- [ ] Handle connection failures gracefully
|
||||
- [ ] Add reconnection logic
|
||||
- [ ] Performance testing with multiple connections
|
||||
|
||||
**Priority 4: Polish and Bug Fixes** (2 days):
|
||||
|
||||
Day 1: Frontend Polish
|
||||
- [ ] Responsive design improvements
|
||||
- [ ] Loading states and animations
|
||||
- [ ] Error message improvements
|
||||
- [ ] Accessibility audit
|
||||
|
||||
Day 2: Backend Polish
|
||||
- [ ] API performance optimization
|
||||
- [ ] Error message improvements
|
||||
- [ ] API documentation updates
|
||||
- [ ] Deployment preparation
|
||||
|
||||
### Sprint Success Criteria
|
||||
|
||||
**Must Have**:
|
||||
- ✅ JWT authentication working (login, registration, protected routes)
|
||||
- ✅ All API endpoints secured with authorization
|
||||
- ✅ Application layer test coverage ≥80%
|
||||
- ✅ Zero critical bugs
|
||||
|
||||
**Should Have**:
|
||||
- ✅ SignalR real-time updates working
|
||||
- ✅ Integration tests for all controllers
|
||||
- ✅ API documentation complete
|
||||
|
||||
**Nice to Have**:
|
||||
- Frontend component tests
|
||||
- Performance optimization
|
||||
- Deployment scripts
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Milestone Completion Criteria
|
||||
|
||||
### M1 Definition of Done
|
||||
|
||||
**Functional Requirements**:
|
||||
- ✅ Complete CRUD for Projects, Epics, Stories, Tasks (DONE)
|
||||
- ✅ Kanban board with drag & drop (DONE)
|
||||
- ⏳ User authentication and authorization (IN PROGRESS)
|
||||
- ⏳ Real-time updates with SignalR (PLANNED)
|
||||
- ✅ Audit logging for all operations (PARTIAL - needs auth context)
|
||||
|
||||
**Quality Requirements**:
|
||||
- ✅ Domain layer test coverage ≥80% (96.98% ACHIEVED)
|
||||
- ⏳ Application layer test coverage ≥80% (40% CURRENT)
|
||||
- ⏳ Integration tests for all API endpoints (PLANNED)
|
||||
- ✅ Zero critical bugs (ACHIEVED)
|
||||
- ✅ Build with zero errors and warnings (ACHIEVED)
|
||||
|
||||
**Documentation Requirements**:
|
||||
- ✅ API documentation (Scalar) (DONE)
|
||||
- ✅ Architecture documentation (DONE)
|
||||
- ⏳ User guide (PENDING)
|
||||
- ⏳ Deployment guide (PENDING)
|
||||
|
||||
**Deployment Requirements**:
|
||||
- ✅ Docker containerization (DONE)
|
||||
- ⏳ Environment configuration (IN PROGRESS)
|
||||
- ⏳ Database migrations (DONE, needs auth tables)
|
||||
- ⏳ CI/CD pipeline (PLANNED)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Conclusion and Next Steps
|
||||
|
||||
### Summary
|
||||
|
||||
ColaFlow has achieved remarkable progress in M1 development, delivering a high-quality, full-stack application in just 3 days. The team demonstrated excellence in architecture, coding quality, and proactive quality assurance. The critical bug fix showcases the effectiveness of our testing strategy.
|
||||
|
||||
### Immediate Next Steps (This Week)
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Start JWT Authentication** (Monday, 2025-11-04)
|
||||
- Assign: Backend Agent
|
||||
- Timeline: 7 days
|
||||
- Priority: Critical
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Complete Application Testing** (Monday, 2025-11-04 - parallel)
|
||||
- Assign: QA Agent + Backend Agent
|
||||
- Timeline: 3 days
|
||||
- Priority: High
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Plan M2 Architecture** (Friday, 2025-11-08 - research only)
|
||||
- Assign: Architect Agent + Researcher Agent
|
||||
- Timeline: 2 days
|
||||
- Priority: Medium
|
||||
|
||||
### Long-term Vision
|
||||
|
||||
**M1 Completion Target**: 2025-11-15 (12 days from now)
|
||||
**M2 Start Target**: 2025-11-18 (3 days buffer)
|
||||
|
||||
**Key Success Factors**:
|
||||
- Maintain code quality (no shortcuts)
|
||||
- Complete security implementation (non-negotiable)
|
||||
- Establish solid testing foundation
|
||||
- Document architectural decisions
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Appendix
|
||||
|
||||
### A. Technology Stack Reference
|
||||
|
||||
**Backend**:
|
||||
- .NET 9 (C# 13)
|
||||
- ASP.NET Core 9 Web API
|
||||
- Entity Framework Core 9
|
||||
- PostgreSQL 16
|
||||
- MediatR 13.1.0
|
||||
- AutoMapper 15.1.0
|
||||
- FluentValidation 12.0.0
|
||||
|
||||
**Frontend**:
|
||||
- Next.js 16.0.1
|
||||
- React 19.2.0
|
||||
- TypeScript 5
|
||||
- TanStack Query v5.90.6
|
||||
- Zustand 5.0.8
|
||||
- shadcn/ui + Tailwind CSS 4
|
||||
|
||||
**Testing**:
|
||||
- xUnit 2.9.2
|
||||
- FluentAssertions 8.8.0
|
||||
- Testcontainers (planned)
|
||||
|
||||
### B. Service Endpoints
|
||||
|
||||
**Running Services**:
|
||||
- PostgreSQL: localhost:5432
|
||||
- Backend API: http://localhost:5167
|
||||
- Frontend Web: http://localhost:3000
|
||||
- API Docs: http://localhost:5167/scalar/v1
|
||||
|
||||
### C. Key Metrics Dashboard
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
M1 Progress: ████████████████░░░ 83%
|
||||
Domain Coverage: ████████████████████ 96.98%
|
||||
Application Coverage: ████████░░░░░░░░░░░░ 40%
|
||||
Test Pass Rate: ████████████████████ 100%
|
||||
Build Quality: ████████████████████ 100%
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### D. Contact and Escalation
|
||||
|
||||
**Product Manager**: Yaojia Wang / Colacoder Team
|
||||
**Report Frequency**: Weekly (every Monday)
|
||||
**Next Report**: 2025-11-10
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
**End of Report**
|
||||
917
reports/2025-11-03-Strategic-Recommendations.md
Normal file
917
reports/2025-11-03-Strategic-Recommendations.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,917 @@
|
||||
# ColaFlow Strategic Recommendations
|
||||
|
||||
**Date**: 2025-11-03
|
||||
**Prepared By**: Product Manager
|
||||
**Audience**: Project Stakeholders and Leadership
|
||||
**Document Type**: Strategic Planning and Decision Support
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Executive Summary
|
||||
|
||||
ColaFlow has achieved remarkable progress in M1 development, delivering 83% completion in just 3 days. This document provides strategic recommendations for completing M1 and transitioning to M2, with a focus on maximizing project success while managing risks.
|
||||
|
||||
### Key Recommendations
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Complete M1 Before Starting M2** (STRONGLY RECOMMENDED)
|
||||
2. **Prioritize Security Immediately** (CRITICAL)
|
||||
3. **Establish CI/CD Pipeline** (HIGH PRIORITY)
|
||||
4. **Maintain Quality Bar** (ONGOING)
|
||||
5. **Plan M2 Research in Parallel** (OPTIONAL)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Recommendation 1: Complete M1 Before Starting M2
|
||||
|
||||
### Recommendation
|
||||
|
||||
**Complete 100% of M1 deliverables before starting M2 implementation work.**
|
||||
|
||||
### Rationale
|
||||
|
||||
**Technical Reasons**:
|
||||
1. **Security is non-negotiable**: Current system has zero authentication, cannot be deployed anywhere
|
||||
2. **Solid foundation needed**: MCP integration (M2) is complex and requires stable base
|
||||
3. **Testing gaps create debt**: 40% Application coverage will compound if left unaddressed
|
||||
4. **Architectural stability**: Authentication affects all layers, must be done correctly first
|
||||
|
||||
**Business Reasons**:
|
||||
1. **Demonstrable MVP**: 100% M1 completion allows stakeholder demonstrations
|
||||
2. **Risk reduction**: Clean milestones reduce project risk
|
||||
3. **Team velocity**: Unfinished work slows future development
|
||||
4. **Customer trust**: Quality completion builds confidence
|
||||
|
||||
**Historical Evidence**:
|
||||
- Critical bug (UpdateTaskStatus 500 error) was discovered during QA
|
||||
- Bug was caused by incomplete Application layer testing
|
||||
- Rushing to M2 would compound this problem
|
||||
|
||||
### Implementation Plan
|
||||
|
||||
**Timeline**: 2 weeks (2025-11-04 to 2025-11-15)
|
||||
|
||||
**Week 1: Authentication and Critical Testing**
|
||||
- Days 1-7: JWT authentication implementation
|
||||
- Days 1-3: Application layer testing (parallel)
|
||||
- Outcome: Secure, tested API
|
||||
|
||||
**Week 2: Real-time Features and Polish**
|
||||
- Days 1-3: SignalR real-time notifications
|
||||
- Days 4-5: Polish and bug fixes
|
||||
- Outcome: Complete, deployable M1
|
||||
|
||||
### Expected Outcomes
|
||||
|
||||
**Functional Outcomes**:
|
||||
- Fully authenticated and authorized API
|
||||
- 80%+ test coverage across all layers
|
||||
- Real-time collaboration features
|
||||
- Zero critical bugs
|
||||
|
||||
**Business Outcomes**:
|
||||
- Deployable MVP for internal testing
|
||||
- Demonstration-ready product
|
||||
- Strong foundation for M2 complexity
|
||||
- Reduced technical debt
|
||||
|
||||
### Risks and Mitigation
|
||||
|
||||
**Risk**: Delays M2 start by 2 weeks
|
||||
- **Mitigation**: M2 research can happen in parallel (no implementation)
|
||||
- **Impact**: Minimal, M2 timeline still achievable
|
||||
|
||||
**Risk**: Team impatience to start AI features
|
||||
- **Mitigation**: Communicate value of solid foundation
|
||||
- **Impact**: Low, team understands quality importance
|
||||
|
||||
### Decision Criteria
|
||||
|
||||
**Choose this option if**:
|
||||
- Quality is a top priority
|
||||
- You want a demonstrable MVP
|
||||
- You value long-term velocity over short-term speed
|
||||
- Security compliance is required
|
||||
|
||||
**Success Metrics**:
|
||||
- M1 completion: 100%
|
||||
- Test coverage: ≥80%
|
||||
- Zero critical bugs
|
||||
- Deployable to staging environment
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Recommendation 2: Prioritize Security Immediately
|
||||
|
||||
### Recommendation
|
||||
|
||||
**Start JWT authentication implementation on Monday, 2025-11-04 (immediately).**
|
||||
|
||||
### Rationale
|
||||
|
||||
**Critical Security Gaps**:
|
||||
1. **All API endpoints are public**: Anyone can read/write any data
|
||||
2. **No user context**: Cannot track who made changes
|
||||
3. **No audit trail**: Cannot meet compliance requirements
|
||||
4. **Cannot deploy**: Even internal testing requires authentication
|
||||
|
||||
**Compliance and Legal**:
|
||||
- GDPR requires user consent and audit trails
|
||||
- Data protection laws require access control
|
||||
- Enterprise customers require security certifications
|
||||
- Internal security policies mandate authentication
|
||||
|
||||
**Risk Assessment**:
|
||||
- **Probability of security incident**: HIGH (if deployed without auth)
|
||||
- **Impact of security incident**: SEVERE (data breach, reputation damage)
|
||||
- **Cost of late implementation**: HIGH (retrofit auth is harder than building it in)
|
||||
|
||||
### Implementation Plan
|
||||
|
||||
**Phase 1: Architecture (Day 1)**
|
||||
- Choose authentication framework (ASP.NET Core Identity recommended)
|
||||
- Design JWT token structure
|
||||
- Define user roles and permissions
|
||||
- Document authentication flows
|
||||
|
||||
**Phase 2: Backend (Days 2-4)**
|
||||
- Implement user management
|
||||
- Implement JWT generation and validation
|
||||
- Add authentication middleware
|
||||
- Secure all API endpoints
|
||||
- Write comprehensive tests
|
||||
|
||||
**Phase 3: Frontend (Days 5-6)**
|
||||
- Implement authentication state management
|
||||
- Build login/registration UI
|
||||
- Add route guards
|
||||
- Handle token refresh
|
||||
- Test user flows
|
||||
|
||||
**Phase 4: Integration and Security Review (Day 7)**
|
||||
- End-to-end testing
|
||||
- Security testing (invalid tokens, expired tokens)
|
||||
- Performance testing
|
||||
- Security review checklist
|
||||
|
||||
### Security Best Practices
|
||||
|
||||
**Password Security**:
|
||||
- Use bcrypt or PBKDF2 for password hashing
|
||||
- Enforce minimum password strength (8+ chars, letters + numbers)
|
||||
- Implement account lockout after failed attempts
|
||||
- Never log or transmit passwords in plain text
|
||||
|
||||
**Token Security**:
|
||||
- Use short token expiration (15-30 minutes)
|
||||
- Implement refresh tokens for session management
|
||||
- Store tokens securely (httpOnly cookies or encrypted localStorage)
|
||||
- Invalidate tokens on logout
|
||||
- Rotate signing keys periodically
|
||||
|
||||
**API Security**:
|
||||
- Use HTTPS only (enforce in production)
|
||||
- Implement rate limiting
|
||||
- Add CORS restrictions
|
||||
- Validate all input
|
||||
- Use parameterized queries (already done with EF Core)
|
||||
|
||||
**Audit and Monitoring**:
|
||||
- Log all authentication attempts (success and failure)
|
||||
- Log all authorization failures
|
||||
- Monitor for suspicious patterns
|
||||
- Implement alerting for security events
|
||||
|
||||
### Expected Outcomes
|
||||
|
||||
**Security Outcomes**:
|
||||
- All API endpoints protected
|
||||
- User authentication and authorization working
|
||||
- Audit trail with user context
|
||||
- Security best practices implemented
|
||||
|
||||
**Business Outcomes**:
|
||||
- Can deploy to staging/production
|
||||
- Meets compliance requirements
|
||||
- Reduces security risk to acceptable levels
|
||||
- Enables user acceptance testing
|
||||
|
||||
### Risks and Mitigation
|
||||
|
||||
**Risk**: Authentication breaks existing functionality
|
||||
- **Mitigation**: Comprehensive integration tests, gradual rollout
|
||||
- **Impact**: Medium, can be caught in testing
|
||||
|
||||
**Risk**: Authentication implementation has vulnerabilities
|
||||
- **Mitigation**: Use proven libraries, security review, penetration testing
|
||||
- **Impact**: Low, with proper implementation
|
||||
|
||||
### Decision Criteria
|
||||
|
||||
**This is NOT optional**:
|
||||
- Security is a critical requirement
|
||||
- No deployment without authentication
|
||||
- No exceptions or shortcuts
|
||||
|
||||
**Success Metrics**:
|
||||
- All endpoints require authentication
|
||||
- Role-based authorization working
|
||||
- Security review passed
|
||||
- Zero authentication vulnerabilities
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Recommendation 3: Establish CI/CD Pipeline
|
||||
|
||||
### Recommendation
|
||||
|
||||
**Implement basic CI/CD pipeline within 2 weeks.**
|
||||
|
||||
### Rationale
|
||||
|
||||
**Quality Assurance Benefits**:
|
||||
1. **Automated testing**: Catch bugs before manual testing
|
||||
2. **Coverage enforcement**: Prevent coverage regression
|
||||
3. **Consistent builds**: Same build process everywhere
|
||||
4. **Fast feedback**: Know immediately if build breaks
|
||||
|
||||
**Development Velocity Benefits**:
|
||||
1. **Faster releases**: Automated deployment to staging
|
||||
2. **Reduced manual work**: No manual build/test/deploy steps
|
||||
3. **Parallel work**: Multiple developers can work without conflicts
|
||||
4. **Confidence**: Tests run automatically on every commit
|
||||
|
||||
**Risk Reduction Benefits**:
|
||||
1. **Catch bugs early**: Before they reach production
|
||||
2. **Prevent regressions**: Tests run on every change
|
||||
3. **Audit trail**: Track what was deployed when
|
||||
4. **Rollback capability**: Easy to revert if needed
|
||||
|
||||
### Implementation Plan
|
||||
|
||||
**Phase 1: GitHub Actions Setup (2 hours)**
|
||||
- Create `.github/workflows/ci.yml` workflow
|
||||
- Configure triggers (push, pull_request)
|
||||
- Set up build matrix (multiple .NET versions if needed)
|
||||
|
||||
**Phase 2: Build and Test (2 hours)**
|
||||
- Add build step (dotnet build)
|
||||
- Add test step (dotnet test)
|
||||
- Add coverage reporting (coverlet)
|
||||
- Configure test result publishing
|
||||
|
||||
**Phase 3: Quality Gates (2 hours)**
|
||||
- Add coverage threshold check (80% minimum)
|
||||
- Add code quality checks (linting, formatting)
|
||||
- Configure branch protection rules
|
||||
- Require passing CI for merges
|
||||
|
||||
**Phase 4: Deployment Pipeline (4 hours)**
|
||||
- Add Docker image build
|
||||
- Configure staging deployment
|
||||
- Add deployment smoke tests
|
||||
- Document deployment process
|
||||
|
||||
### Recommended Pipeline
|
||||
|
||||
```yaml
|
||||
Workflow: CI/CD Pipeline
|
||||
|
||||
Trigger: Push to main, Pull Requests
|
||||
|
||||
Steps:
|
||||
1. Checkout code
|
||||
2. Setup .NET 9
|
||||
3. Restore dependencies
|
||||
4. Build solution (0 errors required)
|
||||
5. Run unit tests (100% pass required)
|
||||
6. Run integration tests (100% pass required)
|
||||
7. Generate coverage report (80% minimum)
|
||||
8. Build Docker image
|
||||
9. Deploy to staging (main branch only)
|
||||
10. Run smoke tests
|
||||
11. Notify team (success or failure)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Tools Recommendation
|
||||
|
||||
**CI/CD Platform**: GitHub Actions (free for public repos, included with GitHub)
|
||||
|
||||
**Coverage Tool**: coverlet (free, integrated with dotnet test)
|
||||
|
||||
**Code Quality**: SonarQube Community Edition (free) or built-in analyzers
|
||||
|
||||
**Deployment**: Docker + Azure/AWS/DigitalOcean (choose based on budget)
|
||||
|
||||
### Expected Outcomes
|
||||
|
||||
**Quality Outcomes**:
|
||||
- Automated test execution on every commit
|
||||
- Coverage tracked and enforced
|
||||
- Build quality maintained
|
||||
- Bugs caught before manual testing
|
||||
|
||||
**Velocity Outcomes**:
|
||||
- Faster feedback cycle (minutes instead of hours)
|
||||
- Reduced manual testing effort
|
||||
- More confident releases
|
||||
- Parallel development enabled
|
||||
|
||||
### Risks and Mitigation
|
||||
|
||||
**Risk**: CI/CD setup takes longer than estimated
|
||||
- **Mitigation**: Start with basic pipeline, enhance iteratively
|
||||
- **Impact**: Low, basic pipeline is simple
|
||||
|
||||
**Risk**: Tests are flaky, causing false failures
|
||||
- **Mitigation**: Identify and fix flaky tests immediately
|
||||
- **Impact**: Medium, can slow down development
|
||||
|
||||
**Risk**: Pipeline costs exceed budget
|
||||
- **Mitigation**: Use free tiers, optimize build times
|
||||
- **Impact**: Low, GitHub Actions has generous free tier
|
||||
|
||||
### Decision Criteria
|
||||
|
||||
**Implement CI/CD if**:
|
||||
- More than one developer working on project
|
||||
- Want to deploy with confidence
|
||||
- Value automation and quality
|
||||
- Plan to deploy frequently
|
||||
|
||||
**Success Metrics**:
|
||||
- CI/CD pipeline running on every commit
|
||||
- 100% of commits pass pipeline
|
||||
- Zero manual build/test steps
|
||||
- Deployment time <10 minutes
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Recommendation 4: Maintain Quality Bar
|
||||
|
||||
### Recommendation
|
||||
|
||||
**Maintain strict quality standards throughout project lifecycle.**
|
||||
|
||||
### Quality Standards
|
||||
|
||||
**Code Quality**:
|
||||
- Zero compiler errors
|
||||
- Zero compiler warnings (or explicitly documented exceptions)
|
||||
- Follow C# coding conventions
|
||||
- Use consistent naming and formatting
|
||||
- Code reviews for all changes
|
||||
|
||||
**Test Quality**:
|
||||
- 80% minimum code coverage (all layers)
|
||||
- 100% test pass rate (no flaky tests)
|
||||
- Test critical paths first (P1 > P2 > P3)
|
||||
- Write tests alongside implementation (not after)
|
||||
- Include integration tests for all API endpoints
|
||||
|
||||
**Architecture Quality**:
|
||||
- Follow Clean Architecture principles
|
||||
- Maintain layer separation (zero coupling violations)
|
||||
- Use DDD patterns consistently
|
||||
- Document architectural decisions
|
||||
- Review architecture for all significant changes
|
||||
|
||||
**Documentation Quality**:
|
||||
- API documentation (OpenAPI/Scalar)
|
||||
- Architecture documentation (diagrams + text)
|
||||
- Code comments for complex logic
|
||||
- User guides for key features
|
||||
- Deployment guides
|
||||
|
||||
### Quality Processes
|
||||
|
||||
**Code Review Process**:
|
||||
1. Developer creates pull request
|
||||
2. Automated CI/CD checks run
|
||||
3. Code reviewer (code-reviewer agent) reviews
|
||||
4. Address feedback and resubmit
|
||||
5. Approval required before merge
|
||||
6. Main branch is always deployable
|
||||
|
||||
**Testing Process**:
|
||||
1. Write tests alongside implementation
|
||||
2. Run tests locally before commit
|
||||
3. CI/CD runs all tests automatically
|
||||
4. Coverage report generated
|
||||
5. Quality gates enforce minimums
|
||||
6. Manual testing for user flows
|
||||
|
||||
**Bug Triage Process**:
|
||||
1. Bug reported (automated or manual)
|
||||
2. Severity assessment (Critical, High, Medium, Low)
|
||||
3. Priority assignment (P0, P1, P2, P3)
|
||||
4. Fix and test
|
||||
5. Root cause analysis for critical bugs
|
||||
6. Prevention measures identified
|
||||
|
||||
### Quality Metrics
|
||||
|
||||
**Track These Metrics**:
|
||||
- Test coverage (by layer)
|
||||
- Test pass rate
|
||||
- Build success rate
|
||||
- Bug count (by severity)
|
||||
- Bug fix time (by severity)
|
||||
- Code review turnaround time
|
||||
|
||||
**Quality Targets**:
|
||||
| Metric | Target | Current | Status |
|
||||
|--------|--------|---------|--------|
|
||||
| Code Coverage | ≥80% | Domain: 96.98%, App: 40% | 🟡 Mixed |
|
||||
| Test Pass Rate | 100% | 100% | 🟢 Good |
|
||||
| Build Success | 100% | 100% | 🟢 Good |
|
||||
| Critical Bugs | 0 | 0 | 🟢 Good |
|
||||
| Code Review Time | <24h | N/A | N/A |
|
||||
|
||||
### Continuous Improvement
|
||||
|
||||
**Retrospectives**:
|
||||
- Sprint retrospectives (every 2 weeks)
|
||||
- Milestone retrospectives (end of M1, M2, etc.)
|
||||
- Incident retrospectives (for critical bugs)
|
||||
|
||||
**Action Items**:
|
||||
- Track action items from retrospectives
|
||||
- Assign owners and due dates
|
||||
- Review progress in next retrospective
|
||||
- Celebrate improvements
|
||||
|
||||
**Learning Culture**:
|
||||
- Share learnings across team
|
||||
- Document lessons learned
|
||||
- Encourage experimentation
|
||||
- Reward quality over speed
|
||||
|
||||
### Expected Outcomes
|
||||
|
||||
**Short-term Outcomes** (1-3 months):
|
||||
- Consistently high code quality
|
||||
- Reduced bug count
|
||||
- Faster development velocity (fewer bugs = less rework)
|
||||
- Team confidence in codebase
|
||||
|
||||
**Long-term Outcomes** (6-12 months):
|
||||
- Maintainable codebase
|
||||
- Easy onboarding for new developers
|
||||
- Low technical debt
|
||||
- High customer satisfaction
|
||||
|
||||
### Risks and Mitigation
|
||||
|
||||
**Risk**: Quality processes slow down development
|
||||
- **Mitigation**: Automate as much as possible
|
||||
- **Impact**: Short-term slowdown, long-term speedup
|
||||
|
||||
**Risk**: Team resists quality processes
|
||||
- **Mitigation**: Communicate benefits, lead by example
|
||||
- **Impact**: Low, team already values quality
|
||||
|
||||
### Decision Criteria
|
||||
|
||||
**Quality is non-negotiable**:
|
||||
- No shortcuts on security
|
||||
- No skipping tests
|
||||
- No ignoring warnings
|
||||
- No deploying broken code
|
||||
|
||||
**Success Metrics**:
|
||||
- Quality metrics meet or exceed targets
|
||||
- Team follows processes consistently
|
||||
- Quality improves over time
|
||||
- Customer satisfaction high
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Recommendation 5: Plan M2 Research in Parallel
|
||||
|
||||
### Recommendation
|
||||
|
||||
**Begin M2 research during Week 2 of M1 Sprint 2 (optional).**
|
||||
|
||||
### Rationale
|
||||
|
||||
**Benefits of Early Research**:
|
||||
1. **Smoother transition**: No gap between M1 and M2
|
||||
2. **Risk identification**: Discover M2 challenges early
|
||||
3. **Better estimates**: More accurate M2 planning
|
||||
4. **Resource optimization**: Utilize slack time
|
||||
|
||||
**No Risk to M1**:
|
||||
- Research is non-blocking
|
||||
- No implementation until M1 complete
|
||||
- Can be paused if M1 needs help
|
||||
- Low effort (2-3 days)
|
||||
|
||||
### Research Scope
|
||||
|
||||
**MCP Protocol Specification**:
|
||||
- Read official MCP specification
|
||||
- Understand MCP Server architecture
|
||||
- Understand MCP Client architecture
|
||||
- Identify ColaFlow-specific requirements
|
||||
|
||||
**MCP Implementation Patterns**:
|
||||
- Research existing MCP Server implementations
|
||||
- Identify best practices
|
||||
- Understand common pitfalls
|
||||
- Evaluate implementation libraries
|
||||
|
||||
**ColaFlow MCP Architecture**:
|
||||
- Design MCP Server architecture for ColaFlow
|
||||
- Identify Resources to expose (projects.search, issues.search, docs.create_draft, reports.daily)
|
||||
- Identify Tools to expose (create_issue, update_status, log_decision)
|
||||
- Design diff preview mechanism
|
||||
- Plan security and authorization
|
||||
|
||||
**Prototype Planning**:
|
||||
- Identify minimal viable MCP Server
|
||||
- Plan prototype scope
|
||||
- Estimate effort for M2 Sprint 1
|
||||
- Identify technical risks
|
||||
|
||||
### Research Deliverables
|
||||
|
||||
**Document 1: MCP Protocol Overview** (1 day)
|
||||
- Summary of MCP specification
|
||||
- Key concepts and terminology
|
||||
- Architecture patterns
|
||||
- Security considerations
|
||||
|
||||
**Document 2: ColaFlow MCP Design** (1 day)
|
||||
- Proposed MCP Server architecture
|
||||
- Resources and Tools design
|
||||
- Diff preview mechanism design
|
||||
- Security and authorization design
|
||||
- Diagrams and examples
|
||||
|
||||
**Document 3: M2 Sprint Plan** (1 day)
|
||||
- M2 broken down into epics and stories
|
||||
- Effort estimates for each story
|
||||
- Sprint 1 scope and timeline
|
||||
- Technical risks and mitigation
|
||||
|
||||
### Resource Allocation
|
||||
|
||||
**Researcher Agent**: 2 days
|
||||
- Research MCP specification
|
||||
- Research implementation patterns
|
||||
- Document findings
|
||||
|
||||
**Architect Agent**: 2 days
|
||||
- Design ColaFlow MCP architecture
|
||||
- Create diagrams
|
||||
- Document design decisions
|
||||
|
||||
**Product Manager**: 1 day
|
||||
- Plan M2 sprints
|
||||
- Create M2 backlog
|
||||
- Prioritize features
|
||||
|
||||
**Total Effort**: 5 days (can be parallelized)
|
||||
|
||||
### Timeline
|
||||
|
||||
**Week 2 of M1 Sprint 2** (2025-11-11 to 2025-11-15):
|
||||
- Monday-Tuesday: MCP research (Researcher Agent)
|
||||
- Wednesday-Thursday: MCP architecture design (Architect Agent)
|
||||
- Friday: M2 planning (Product Manager)
|
||||
|
||||
**No impact on M1 completion**:
|
||||
- M1 critical work (auth, testing) happens in Week 1
|
||||
- Week 2 is polish and bug fixes (lower intensity)
|
||||
- Research can happen in parallel
|
||||
- Can be paused if needed
|
||||
|
||||
### Expected Outcomes
|
||||
|
||||
**Knowledge Outcomes**:
|
||||
- Team understands MCP protocol
|
||||
- Clear MCP architecture design
|
||||
- Identified technical risks
|
||||
- Realistic M2 estimates
|
||||
|
||||
**Planning Outcomes**:
|
||||
- Ready to start M2 immediately after M1
|
||||
- No planning delay between milestones
|
||||
- Clear M2 Sprint 1 scope
|
||||
- Resource allocation planned
|
||||
|
||||
### Risks and Mitigation
|
||||
|
||||
**Risk**: Research distracts from M1 completion
|
||||
- **Mitigation**: Only start in Week 2, after critical work done
|
||||
- **Impact**: Low, Week 2 has slack time
|
||||
|
||||
**Risk**: Research uncovers major blocker
|
||||
- **Mitigation**: Better to find out early than late
|
||||
- **Impact**: Positive, allows contingency planning
|
||||
|
||||
**Risk**: Research is wasted if M1 delayed
|
||||
- **Mitigation**: Research is low effort (5 days)
|
||||
- **Impact**: Minimal, knowledge is never wasted
|
||||
|
||||
### Decision Criteria
|
||||
|
||||
**Do M2 research if**:
|
||||
- M1 Week 1 goes smoothly
|
||||
- Critical work (auth, testing) on track
|
||||
- Team has bandwidth in Week 2
|
||||
- Want to minimize gap between M1 and M2
|
||||
|
||||
**Skip M2 research if**:
|
||||
- M1 behind schedule
|
||||
- Team fully occupied with M1
|
||||
- Need buffer time for unknowns
|
||||
- Prefer clean milestone separation
|
||||
|
||||
**Success Metrics**:
|
||||
- Research documents completed
|
||||
- M2 architecture design approved
|
||||
- M2 Sprint 1 planned
|
||||
- No impact on M1 completion date
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Decision Framework Summary
|
||||
|
||||
### Three Options for Next Steps
|
||||
|
||||
#### Option A: Complete M1 (100%) - STRONGLY RECOMMENDED ✅
|
||||
|
||||
**Timeline**: 2 weeks
|
||||
**Effort**: High
|
||||
**Risk**: Low
|
||||
**Value**: High
|
||||
|
||||
**What You Get**:
|
||||
- Secure, authenticated API
|
||||
- 80%+ test coverage
|
||||
- Real-time collaboration features
|
||||
- Deployable MVP
|
||||
- Strong foundation for M2
|
||||
|
||||
**When to Choose**:
|
||||
- Quality is top priority
|
||||
- Security compliance required
|
||||
- Want demonstrable MVP
|
||||
- Value long-term velocity
|
||||
|
||||
**Recommendation**: STRONGLY RECOMMENDED
|
||||
- This is the best choice for project success
|
||||
- Reduces risk, increases quality
|
||||
- Enables stakeholder demonstrations
|
||||
- Prevents technical debt
|
||||
|
||||
#### Option B: Start M2 Immediately - NOT RECOMMENDED ❌
|
||||
|
||||
**Timeline**: Start now
|
||||
**Effort**: High
|
||||
**Risk**: High
|
||||
**Value**: Low (short-term)
|
||||
|
||||
**What You Get**:
|
||||
- Early start on AI features
|
||||
- Faster path to M2 completion
|
||||
- Exciting features to show
|
||||
|
||||
**What You Lose**:
|
||||
- Cannot deploy anywhere (no auth)
|
||||
- Accumulates technical debt
|
||||
- May require significant rework
|
||||
- Risk of compounding problems
|
||||
|
||||
**When to Choose**:
|
||||
- NEVER - Security is non-negotiable
|
||||
- This option is included for completeness only
|
||||
|
||||
**Recommendation**: NOT RECOMMENDED
|
||||
- High risk, low reward
|
||||
- Will slow overall progress
|
||||
- Creates technical debt
|
||||
- May jeopardize project success
|
||||
|
||||
#### Option C: Hybrid Approach - CONDITIONAL ⚠️
|
||||
|
||||
**Timeline**: 2 weeks (auth) + M2 research
|
||||
**Effort**: High
|
||||
**Risk**: Medium
|
||||
**Value**: Medium
|
||||
|
||||
**What You Get**:
|
||||
- Secure, authenticated API (critical)
|
||||
- Critical testing complete
|
||||
- M2 research done (head start)
|
||||
- Some M1 work deferred (SignalR)
|
||||
|
||||
**What You Lose**:
|
||||
- Not 100% M1 complete
|
||||
- Real-time features deferred
|
||||
- Split focus may reduce quality
|
||||
|
||||
**When to Choose**:
|
||||
- Timeline is absolutely critical
|
||||
- Willing to accept incomplete M1
|
||||
- Authentication is non-negotiable
|
||||
- Can defer nice-to-have features
|
||||
|
||||
**Recommendation**: ACCEPTABLE IF TIMELINE IS CRITICAL
|
||||
- Authentication must be done (non-negotiable)
|
||||
- Testing must be done (non-negotiable)
|
||||
- SignalR can be deferred (nice-to-have)
|
||||
- M2 research is optional (low risk)
|
||||
|
||||
### Recommended Choice: Option A
|
||||
|
||||
**Complete M1 (100%)** is the strongly recommended choice because:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Security**: Non-negotiable, must be done correctly
|
||||
2. **Quality**: Strong foundation prevents future problems
|
||||
3. **Value**: Deployable MVP enables demonstrations
|
||||
4. **Risk**: Low-risk path to project success
|
||||
5. **Velocity**: Long-term velocity is more important than short-term speed
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Implementation Roadmap
|
||||
|
||||
### Immediate Actions (This Week - 2025-11-04 to 2025-11-08)
|
||||
|
||||
**Monday (Day 1)**:
|
||||
- [ ] Product Manager: Review and approve this strategic plan
|
||||
- [ ] Product Manager: Communicate plan to all agents
|
||||
- [ ] Backend Agent: Start JWT authentication architecture
|
||||
- [ ] QA Agent: Start Application layer testing (parallel)
|
||||
- [ ] Architect Agent: Review authentication design
|
||||
|
||||
**Tuesday-Thursday (Days 2-4)**:
|
||||
- [ ] Backend Agent: Implement authentication (database, commands, API)
|
||||
- [ ] QA Agent: Complete Query Handler tests
|
||||
- [ ] Frontend Agent: Prepare for frontend auth integration
|
||||
|
||||
**Friday (Day 5)**:
|
||||
- [ ] All Agents: Mid-sprint review
|
||||
- [ ] Product Manager: Assess progress, adjust plan if needed
|
||||
- [ ] Demo authentication progress
|
||||
|
||||
### Next Week (Week 2 - 2025-11-11 to 2025-11-15)
|
||||
|
||||
**Monday-Tuesday (Days 6-7)**:
|
||||
- [ ] Frontend Agent: Implement authentication UI
|
||||
- [ ] Backend Agent: Start SignalR implementation
|
||||
- [ ] QA Agent: Integration testing
|
||||
|
||||
**Wednesday-Friday (Days 8-10)**:
|
||||
- [ ] Backend + Frontend: Complete SignalR implementation
|
||||
- [ ] All Agents: Polish and bug fixes
|
||||
- [ ] QA Agent: Final testing
|
||||
- [ ] Product Manager: Sprint retrospective
|
||||
- [ ] **Celebrate M1 completion!**
|
||||
|
||||
### Following Week (Week 3 - 2025-11-18 to 2025-11-22)
|
||||
|
||||
**M1 Finalization and M2 Kickoff**:
|
||||
- [ ] Product Manager: M1 completion report
|
||||
- [ ] All Agents: M1 retrospective
|
||||
- [ ] Architect Agent: Present M2 architecture design
|
||||
- [ ] Product Manager: M2 Sprint 1 planning
|
||||
- [ ] All Agents: M2 Sprint 1 kickoff
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Success Factors and Risks
|
||||
|
||||
### Critical Success Factors
|
||||
|
||||
**Technical Success Factors**:
|
||||
1. Authentication implemented correctly and securely
|
||||
2. Test coverage meets 80% target
|
||||
3. Zero critical bugs at M1 completion
|
||||
4. Clean architecture maintained
|
||||
5. Code quality standards upheld
|
||||
|
||||
**Process Success Factors**:
|
||||
1. Clear communication across team
|
||||
2. Daily standups and progress tracking
|
||||
3. Risk identification and mitigation
|
||||
4. Quality over speed mindset
|
||||
5. Collaborative problem solving
|
||||
|
||||
**People Success Factors**:
|
||||
1. Team alignment on priorities
|
||||
2. Clear roles and responsibilities
|
||||
3. Adequate time and resources
|
||||
4. Learning culture and continuous improvement
|
||||
5. Celebration of achievements
|
||||
|
||||
### Key Risks and Mitigation
|
||||
|
||||
**Technical Risks**:
|
||||
|
||||
**Risk 1: Authentication Implementation Complexity**
|
||||
- Probability: Medium
|
||||
- Impact: High
|
||||
- Mitigation: Use proven libraries, security review, buffer time
|
||||
|
||||
**Risk 2: Testing Takes Longer Than Estimated**
|
||||
- Probability: Medium
|
||||
- Impact: Medium
|
||||
- Mitigation: Focus on P1 tests first, defer P3 if needed
|
||||
|
||||
**Risk 3: Integration Issues**
|
||||
- Probability: Low
|
||||
- Impact: Medium
|
||||
- Mitigation: Daily integration testing, clear contracts
|
||||
|
||||
**Process Risks**:
|
||||
|
||||
**Risk 4: Scope Creep**
|
||||
- Probability: Medium
|
||||
- Impact: Medium
|
||||
- Mitigation: Strict scope control, defer non-critical features
|
||||
|
||||
**Risk 5: Communication Breakdown**
|
||||
- Probability: Low
|
||||
- Impact: High
|
||||
- Mitigation: Daily standups, clear documentation, proactive updates
|
||||
|
||||
**Resource Risks**:
|
||||
|
||||
**Risk 6: Time Constraints**
|
||||
- Probability: Low
|
||||
- Impact: Medium
|
||||
- Mitigation: Prioritization, buffer time, flexible P3 tasks
|
||||
|
||||
**Risk 7: Knowledge Gaps**
|
||||
- Probability: Low
|
||||
- Impact: Low
|
||||
- Mitigation: Research before implementation, documentation
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Conclusion
|
||||
|
||||
ColaFlow has achieved exceptional progress in M1 development. The path forward is clear:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Complete M1 (100%)** - Strongly recommended
|
||||
2. **Prioritize Security** - Non-negotiable
|
||||
3. **Maintain Quality** - Essential for success
|
||||
4. **Plan M2 Research** - Optional but valuable
|
||||
|
||||
By following these recommendations, ColaFlow will:
|
||||
- Deliver a secure, high-quality MVP
|
||||
- Build a strong foundation for future growth
|
||||
- Minimize technical debt and risk
|
||||
- Maximize long-term development velocity
|
||||
- Create a product stakeholders can be proud of
|
||||
|
||||
The next 2 weeks are critical. With focused execution on authentication, testing, and real-time features, M1 will be complete and ready for demonstration. M2 (AI integration) will then build on this solid foundation, delivering the innovative features that make ColaFlow unique.
|
||||
|
||||
**Success is within reach. Let's execute with excellence.**
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
**Prepared By**: Product Manager
|
||||
**Date**: 2025-11-03
|
||||
**Next Review**: 2025-11-10 (Mid-Sprint Review)
|
||||
|
||||
**Approval Required From**:
|
||||
- Project Stakeholders
|
||||
- Technical Leadership
|
||||
- Team Members
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
**Appendix A: Quick Reference Decision Matrix**
|
||||
|
||||
| Criterion | Option A (Complete M1) | Option B (Start M2) | Option C (Hybrid) |
|
||||
|-----------|----------------------|-------------------|------------------|
|
||||
| Security | ✅ Complete | ❌ None | ✅ Complete |
|
||||
| Quality | ✅ High | ❌ Low | 🟡 Medium |
|
||||
| Risk | 🟢 Low | 🔴 High | 🟡 Medium |
|
||||
| Timeline | 2 weeks | 0 weeks | 2 weeks |
|
||||
| Deployable | ✅ Yes | ❌ No | ✅ Yes |
|
||||
| Technical Debt | 🟢 Minimal | 🔴 High | 🟡 Some |
|
||||
| Recommendation | ✅ STRONGLY RECOMMENDED | ❌ NOT RECOMMENDED | 🟡 CONDITIONAL |
|
||||
|
||||
**Appendix B: Key Contacts**
|
||||
|
||||
- **Product Manager**: Yaojia Wang / Colacoder Team
|
||||
- **Technical Lead**: Architect Agent
|
||||
- **Quality Lead**: QA Agent
|
||||
- **Security Review**: Backend Agent + Architect Agent
|
||||
|
||||
**Appendix C: Related Documents**
|
||||
|
||||
- Project Status Report: `reports/2025-11-03-Project-Status-Report.md`
|
||||
- Next Sprint Action Plan: `reports/2025-11-03-Next-Sprint-Action-Plan.md`
|
||||
- Product Roadmap: `product.md`
|
||||
- Project Progress: `progress.md`
|
||||
- Architecture Design: `docs/M1-Architecture-Design.md`
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
**End of Strategic Recommendations**
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user