Definition of Done
Done-ness is defined differently at different stages of development and for different purposes.
The tables below describe the criteria that need to be taken into account by Product Owners (for Team Increment work), by Feature Owners (for System Increment), by Capability Owners (for Solution Increment work), and by Release Managers (for Software Releases).
Please note that when a Product/Feature/Capability Owner, or Release Manager marks a Story/Feature/Capability/Release as Done, all applicable criteria from the Definition of Done are expected to be fulfilled. When that is not possible, or applicable to an item, the Product/Feature/Capability Owner, or Release Manager MUST indicate in the comments why those elements of the Definition of Done do not apply to that Product/Feature/Capability or Release.
Failure to justify the lack of complete compliance with the Definition of Done results in decreasing quality, and increased Technical Debt, so please be very mindful of this Definition of Done.
Definition of Done checklists are mandated to be used at all stages of development. The definition at the Team Increment may be customised to the context of a team e.g. Enabling Team vs Feature Team. Speak to an RTE to arrange this.
Team Increment
Issue Type |
Definition of Done |
---|---|
Story/Enabler |
Code
Artefacts
Integration
Process
|
Spike |
Documentation
Process
|
System Increment
Issue Type |
Definition of Done |
---|---|
Feature/Enabler |
Child Stories/Enablers
Documentation
Process
|
Spike |
Documentation
Process
|
Solution Increment
Issue Type |
Definition of Done |
---|---|
Capability/Enabler |
Child Stories/Enablers
Documentation
Process
|
Release
Issue Type |
Definition of Done |
---|---|
Release |
|
Formally Controlled Project Documentation
Documents that are matured to the extent that they quantify an impact on safety, security, quality, schedule, cost, profit or the environment should be validated and formally controlled as per the SKA Document Creation, Validation and Release Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) (SKA-TEL-SKAO-0000765). Until such time, the Lightweight Document Process and Repository may used to manage these documents.
Thereafter, these documents must be formally reviewed and placed in the project’s configuration management system. Whilst there is an unavoidable overhead to this we aim to make it as efficient as possible. However, this level of documentation requires you to follow the process in the Configuration Management part of Confluence, specifically:
Document number obtained by completing and forwarding the New Document Request Form to mailto:cm@skatelescope.org.
Document is reviewed by suitable reviewer(s).
Document is in eB and signed off.