Software Inspection Roles*
Author: the producer (or current owner) of the subject work product
Moderator:an inspector responsible for organizing, executing, and reporting a software inspection
Reader:an inspector who guides the examination of the work product at the meeting
Recorder:an inspector who enters all the defects found during the meeting on the Inspection Defect List
Inspector:a member of an inspection team other than the author. Often chosen to represent a specific development role: e.g., designer, tester, technical writer.
Software Inspection Agenda*
The inspection meeting is conducted by the moderator. There is an established agenda that consists of:
- Introduction
- Establishing preparedness
- Examining the material and recording defects
- Reviewing defect list
- Determining disposition
- Debriefing
Introduction:
The moderator introduces the inspectors and the material to be examined and states the purpose of the meeting
Establishing preparedness:
Each inspector reports his or her preparation times. The moderator sums these times and determines whether or not there has been sufficient preparation for an effective meeting.
Examining the material and recording defects:
The activities below are the major activities of an inspection meeting.
The reader paces the group through the material by paraphrasing each “line” or section of the material aloud for the group. The reader selects the most effective sequence for defect detection.
The other inspectors (including the reader) interrupt with questions and concerns as the reader proceeds through the material.
Each concern is either handled immediately or tabled and the recorder notes these items.
The recorder notes the location, description, class, and type on the Inspection Defect List whenever the group agrees, or the moderator rules, that a defect has been detected.
Reviewing defect list:
After the reading and recording of defects, the moderator asks the recorder to review the Defect List to make sure that all defects have been recorded and correctly classified.
Determining disposition:
The inspectors determine the disposition of the material: “meets,” “rework,” or “re-inspect.” The disposition of “meets” is given when the work product as inspected meets the exit criteria (or needs only trivial corrections) required for that type of inspection. The disposition of “re-inspect” is given when rework will change the work product in a substantial way.
Debriefing:
The moderator conducts an exercise in which s/he gives each participant the opportunity to briefly share his or her experience of the meeting in a supportive environment. The purpose of this exercise is to reduce any interpersonal tension that may have developed during the meeting.
INSPECTION PROFILE*
System: ______Version: ____ Date: ______
Unit (e.g., subsystem, component, class, method): ______
Inspection type:
Internal RequirementsDetail DesignTest Plan
High Level DesignCodeTest Cases
Size of material: ______(unit) ______
Is this a re-inspection: No Yes
Summary of open items: ______
______
______
______
______
______
______
______
Other comments: ______
______
______
______
______
Prepared by: ______
INSPECTION DEFECT LIST*
System: ______Version: _____ Date: ______
Unit: ______
Moderator: ______Room: ______Phone: ______
Inspection type:
Internal RequirementsDetail DesignTest Plan
High Level DesignCodeTest Cases
Defect
Document: Location: Defect Description: Type: Class:
______
______
______
______
______
______
______
______
______
______
______
______
______
______
Defect type: IF=Interface DA=Data LO=Logic IO=Input/Output PF=Performance HF=Human Factors
ST=Standards DC=Documentation SN=Syntax OT=Other
Defect class: M=Missing W=Wrong E=Extra
Defect stage: RQ=Requirements HL=High Level Design DD=Detail Design CD=Code TP=Test Plan
TC=Test Case
*Ackerman, Frank A. “Software Inspections and the Cost Effective Production of Reliable Software.” Software Engineering. pps. 235-255. Los Alamitos, CA: 1997.