What This Document Is
This is a draft commitment package for a software engineering project, specifically the “Rebaselined Development Commitment Package” (RDCP) within the CSCI 577 course at the University of Southern California. It represents a crucial milestone in the foundational phase of a larger software development lifecycle. The RDCP requires students to synthesize and update a comprehensive set of project artifacts based on feedback and evolving project understanding. It’s a deliverable intended for review and approval at a formal project assessment.
Why This Document Matters
This package is essential for students undertaking team-based software engineering projects. It’s designed to ensure all team members are aligned on the project’s scope, requirements, design, and plan *after* initial feedback and analysis. Successfully completing this RDCP demonstrates a student’s ability to adapt to change, incorporate stakeholder input, and maintain a cohesive project vision. It’s particularly relevant as projects move from initial conceptualization into the development stages, and is a key component of demonstrating project readiness.
Common Limitations or Challenges
This document outlines the *requirements* for the RDCP, but does not contain a completed example or step-by-step instructions for its creation. It details the expected artifacts and exit criteria for each, but the specific content and tailoring to individual project needs are the responsibility of the student team. It assumes familiarity with the course’s Instructional ICM-SW Electronic Process Guide (ICM EPG) and the provided artifact templates. It also doesn’t offer solutions to potential conflicts or challenges that may arise during team collaboration or feedback integration.
What This Document Provides
* A detailed list of required project artifacts, including the Operational Concept Description, System Requirements Definition, and Architecture Description.
* Specific exit criteria for each artifact, outlining the updates needed to reflect changes in project understanding.
* Guidance on incorporating feedback from various sources (clients, reviewers, instructors).
* Requirements for planning documents, such as the Life Cycle Plan, Feasibility Evidence Description, and Iteration Plan.
* Instructions regarding file naming conventions and submission procedures.
* A section dedicated to justifying deviations from standard templates, if applicable.
