Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- report:prm [2026/05/21 10:15] – [Sprint Evaluations] team3
+++ report:prm [2026/05/26 10:39] (current) – [Sprint Evaluations] team3
@@ Line 658: / Line 658: @@
 === Sprint 8 ===
-{{:report:sprint_8.png?400|}}
+Sprint 8 in Figure {{ref>fig:sprint8}} covered the period from April 30th to May 14th, 2026, with an initial workload of approximately 61 story points. The burndown chart showed a typical late-crunch pattern: after a small reduction at the start of the sprint, progress stayed mostly flat until May 12th, when most tasks were completed. By the end of the sprint, the remaining workload had decreased to around 23 story points, showing significant progress despite work being completed mainly at the end of the sprint.
+{{:report:sprint_8.png?800|}}
 === Sprint 9 ===
-{{:report:sprint_9.png?400|}}
+Sprint 9 in Figure {{ref>fig:sprint9}} covered the period from May 14th to May 21st, 2026, with an initial workload of approximately 55 story points. The burndown chart showed very limited progress during most of the sprint, with only small reductions in remaining work occurring near the end of the sprint period.
+By the end of the sprint, the workload had decreased to around 43 story points, indicating that only a small portion of tasks was completed during this sprint. The burndown remained far above the ideal progression line throughout the sprint, suggesting that several tasks were still ongoing at the time of capture.
+{{:report:sprint_9.png?800|}}
 ==== Sprint Outcomes ====
 /*
@@ Line 677: / Line 682: @@
 The teams' first retrospective in Figure {{ref>fig:retro1}} showed the teams' different education backgrounds and speed, the teams' general workload, and the main idea being lost. To fix this the team decided to book a 1-hour meeting where everyone spoke for 5 min and said where they think the project should head. This helped us find common ground. Other conclusions regarding speed and workload: the team decided to meet more often to spread the workload fairly through the team.
-<WRAP centeralign>
 <figure fig:retro1>
 {{ :report:retrospective1.png?800 |}}
@@ Line 745: / Line 750: @@
 Several improvement points were identified. Communication was weaker during the holiday break, and the team agreed that more regular progress updates are needed. Some inconsistencies in poster designs were also noted, highlighting the need for a more unified visual style. In addition, tasks and deliverables for the rest of the semester should be divided more clearly so everyone knows their responsibilities. Delays with STL files and issues with materials provided by the teachers were also mentioned as challenges during the sprint.
-{{:report:restrospective_8.png?400|}}
+<WRAP centeralign>
+{{:report:restrospective_8.png?800|}}
+Retrospective 9 in Figure {{ref>fig:retro9}} was held with Maria absent. The team reported strong technical progress during the sprint: the prototype advanced significantly, the application was successfully connected to the hardware, most sensors were functioning, and the 3D design was completed and ready for printing. The team also received the project components and was finally able to begin working with the physical sensors. Teachers were satisfied with the project’s direction and overall progress.
+Several challenges were also identified. Some incorrect components were delivered, which affected the initial electrical system design, and the approaching prototype deadline created additional pressure on the team. Workload distribution was mentioned multiple times as an area for improvement, with some members experiencing a heavy workload depending on their technical background. The team also agreed that communication about weekly progress should improve further.
+<WRAP centeralign>
+{{:report:restrospective_9.png?800|}}
+{{:report:restrospective_9bis.png?800|}}
 ==== Summary ====