Produced by Araxis Merge on 10/5/2017 9:24:06 AM Central Daylight Time. See www.araxis.com for information about Merge. This report uses XHTML and CSS2, and is best viewed with a modern standards-compliant browser. For optimum results when printing this report, use landscape orientation and enable printing of background images and colours in your browser.
| # | Location | File | Last Modified |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | RT_2_47.zip\docs | EPIP_Test_Evaluation_(RT_2.0_47).doc | Thu Oct 5 12:54:44 2017 UTC |
| 2 | RT_2_47.zip\docs | EPIP_Test_Evaluation_(RT_2.0_47).doc | Thu Oct 5 13:24:04 2017 UTC |
| Description | Between Files 1 and 2 |
|
|---|---|---|
| Text Blocks | Lines | |
| Unchanged | 4 | 542 |
| Changed | 0 | 0 |
| Inserted | 0 | 0 |
| Removed | 3 | 3 |
| Whitespace | |
|---|---|
| Character case | Differences in character case are significant |
| Line endings | Differences in line endings (CR and LF characters) are ignored |
| CR/LF characters | Not shown in the comparison detail |
No regular expressions were active.
| 1 | Test Evalu ation Temp lateExisti ng Product Intake Pr ogram (EPI P) | ||
| 2 | Patch RT*2 .0*47 | ||
| 3 | Test Evalu ation | ||
| 4 | |||
| 5 | Department of Vetera ns Affairs | ||
| 6 | August 201 7 | ||
| 7 | Version 1. 0 | ||
| 8 | Revision H istory | ||
| 9 | Note: The revision h istory cyc le begins once chang es or enha ncements a re request ed after t he Communi cations Pl an has bee n baseline d. | ||
| 10 | DateVersio nDescripti onAuthor08 /07/20171. 0Initial d ocument.EP IP Project TeamArtif act Ration ale | ||
| 11 | The test e valuation document i s the prim ary output of the te st and eva luation pr ocess, an integral p art of the systems e ngineering process, which iden tifies lev els of per formance a nd assists the devel oper in co rrecting d eficiencie s. | ||
| 12 | Table of C ontents | ||
| 13 | 11. | ||
| 14 | Test Evalu ation Intr oduction | ||
| 15 | |||
| 16 | |||
| 17 | 11.1. | ||
| 18 | Test Evalu ation Scop e | ||
| 19 | |||
| 20 | |||
| 21 | 11.2. | ||
| 22 | Test Archi tecture | ||
| 23 | |||
| 24 | |||
| 25 | 11.3. | ||
| 26 | Test Envir onment/Con figuration | ||
| 27 | |||
| 28 | |||
| 29 | 21.4. | ||
| 30 | Installati on Process | ||
| 31 | |||
| 32 | |||
| 33 | 22. | ||
| 34 | Test Data | ||
| 35 | |||
| 36 | |||
| 37 | 23. | ||
| 38 | Issues | ||
| 39 | |||
| 40 | |||
| 41 | 24. | ||
| 42 | Test Execu tion Log | ||
| 43 | |||
| 44 | |||
| 45 | 35. | ||
| 46 | Test Defec t Log | ||
| 47 | |||
| 48 | |||
| 49 | 36. | ||
| 50 | Test Resul ts Summary | ||
| 51 | |||
| 52 | |||
| 53 | 36.1. | ||
| 54 | Defect Sev erity and Priority L evels | ||
| 55 | |||
| 56 | |||
| 57 | 36.2. | ||
| 58 | Total Defe cts by Sev erity Leve l | ||
| 59 | |||
| 60 | |||
| 61 | 36.3. | ||
| 62 | Breakdown of Test Re sults | ||
| 63 | |||
| 64 | |||
| 65 | 36.4. | ||
| 66 | Performanc e Testing | ||
| 67 | |||
| 68 | |||
| 69 | 37. | ||
| 70 | Test Cover age | ||
| 71 | |||
| 72 | |||
| 73 | 37.1. | ||
| 74 | Requiremen ts Covered | ||
| 75 | |||
| 76 | |||
| 77 | 47.2. | ||
| 78 | Section 50 8 Complian ce Coverag e | ||
| 79 | |||
| 80 | |||
| 81 | 48. | ||
| 82 | Suggested Actions | ||
| 83 | |||
| 84 | |||
| 85 | 49. | ||
| 86 | Defect Sev erity and Priority D efinitions | ||
| 87 | |||
| 88 | |||
| 89 | 59.1. | ||
| 90 | Defect Sev erity Leve l | ||
| 91 | |||
| 92 | |||
| 93 | 59.1.1. | ||
| 94 | Severity L evel 1 – C ritical | ||
| 95 | |||
| 96 | |||
| 97 | 59.1.2. | ||
| 98 | Severity L evel 2 - H igh | ||
| 99 | |||
| 100 | |||
| 101 | 69.1.3. | ||
| 102 | Severity L evel 3 - M edium | ||
| 103 | |||
| 104 | |||
| 105 | 69.1.4. | ||
| 106 | Severity L evel 4 - L ow | ||
| 107 | |||
| 108 | |||
| 109 | 69.2. | ||
| 110 | Priority C lassificat ions | ||
| 111 | |||
| 112 | |||
| 113 | 69.2.1. | ||
| 114 | Priority 1 - Resolve Immediate ly | ||
| 115 | |||
| 116 | |||
| 117 | 69.2.2. | ||
| 118 | Priority 2 - Give Hi gh Attenti on | ||
| 119 | |||
| 120 | |||
| 121 | 69.2.3. | ||
| 122 | Priority 3 - Normal Queue | ||
| 123 | |||
| 124 | |||
| 125 | 69.2.4. | ||
| 126 | Priority 4 - Low Pri ority | ||
| 127 | |||
| 128 | |||
| 129 | 710. | ||
| 130 | Optional T ables, Cha rts, and G raphs | ||
| 131 | |||
| 132 | |||
| 133 | 811. | ||
| 134 | Document A pproval Si gnatures | ||
| 135 | |||
| 136 | |||
| 137 | 9Appendix A - Test E xecution L og | ||
| 138 | |||
| 139 | |||
| 140 | 10Appendix B – Defec t Log | ||
| 141 | |||
| 142 | |||
| 143 | |||
| 144 | |||
| 145 | Test Evalu ation Intr oduction | ||
| 146 | The purpos e of this Test Evalu ation is t o: | ||
| 147 | Identify t he testing approach used. | ||
| 148 | Present a summary an alysis of the key te st results from the remediatio n of this intake for review an d assessme nt by desi gnated sta keholders. | ||
| 149 | Provide a general st atement of the quali ty of the system und er test. | ||
| 150 | Make recom mendations for futur e testing efforts. | ||
| 151 | Test Evalu ation Scop e | ||
| 152 | The scope of this Te st Evaluat ion is to verify the functiona lity of th e Patch RT *2.0*47 co de modific ation, as determined by Functi onal, Comp onent Inte gration/Sy stem, and Regression testing. Testing ac tivities f ollowed th e specific ations out lined in t he followi ng Master Test Plan: RT*2.0*47 Master Te st Plan (i ncluded in Appendix A). | ||
| 153 | Test Archi tecture | ||
| 154 | Following are the EP IP test ac counts use d by the L eidos Deve lopment an d SQA Test ing teams to test RT *2.0*47. | ||
| 155 | Developmen t Test Acc ounts | ||
| 156 | (For Unit Testing)SQ A Test Acc ounts | ||
| 157 | (For Funct ional, Reg ression, a nd Compone nt Integra tion and S ystem Test ing)VistAS 1 ( altern ate name: D1S1)VistA G1 (altern ate name: D1G1) Vist AS2 (alter nate name: D1S2) – | ||
| 158 | for CPRS G UI testing onlyVistA G2 (altern ate name: D1G2) – | ||
| 159 | for CPRS G UI testing onlyTest Environmen t/Configur ation | ||
| 160 | The EPIP t est accoun ts are mai ntained by the EPIP System Adm inistrator , who inst alls all V A-released patches a s soon as they are n ationally released. All EPIP t est accoun ts are clo ned from e xisting VA Enterpris e Testing Services ( ETS) test accounts. The Comput erized Pat ient Recor d System ( CPRS) Grap hical User Interface (GUI) exe cutable is configure d for each VistA ins tance util izing a un ique Inter net Protoc ol (IP) ad dress to c onnect to the VistA applicatio ns. Any up dates to t he CPRS GU I executab le are han dled by th e EPIP Sys tem Admini strator. | ||
| 161 | All EPIP T est Engine ers and De velopers w ho have th e proper c redentials can acces s the test accounts. The VA Au stin Infor mation Tec hnology Ce nter (AITC ) support team reset s password s and sets up new ac cess crede ntials on an as-need ed basis. | ||
| 162 | Installati on Process | ||
| 163 | As soon as the remed iation pro cess is co mplete and the patch is availa ble for te sting, a K IDS build is created in the De velopment account an d then sen t to FORUM for final packaging . The patc h is then submitted to the VA SQA Lead’s Mailman a ccount for installat ion. | ||
| 164 | An EPIP De veloper or Test Engi neer utili zes the KI DS Install ation proc ess to ext ract the b uild from the patch and instal l the buil d into a t est accoun t. The ind ividual wh o installs the patch verifies the routin e checksum s and also checks fo r errors d uring the installati on process . If the p atch is su ccessfully installed without a ny errors, then the EPIP Test team proce eds with F unctional, Regressio n, and Com ponent Int egration a nd System testing. I f defects are found, then the Developmen t team wor ks to find a resolut ion and cr eates new versions o f the patc h until al l defects are resolv ed. | ||
| 165 | Test Data | ||
| 166 | The SQA Te sting team utilizes the test d ata in the designate d test acc ounts (D1G 1, D1G2). | ||
| 167 | The test d ata is enc rypted fol lowing the standards set forth by the VA Office of Informati on & Techn ology (OI& T). All Pe rsonally I dentifiabl e Informat ion (PII) and Protec ted Health Informati on (PHI) i s scrubbed and is no t availabl e to the T est Engine ers. | ||
| 168 | All testin g is execu ted using encrypted test patie nts availa ble from a ny of the EPIP test accounts. Examples o f encrypte d test pat ients: | ||
| 169 | AAAHURMMX, XPHY | ||
| 170 | BADHB, HAA DXS | ||
| 171 | FDHUX, YHI J | ||
| 172 | All tests were execu ted manual ly by EPIP Test Engi neers. | ||
| 173 | Issues | ||
| 174 | The follow ing issues were enco untered du ring testi ng of RT*2 .0*47. | ||
| 175 | TitleIssue Descripti onTypeSeve rityN/AN/A N/AN/ATest Execution Log | ||
| 176 | The Test E xecution L og records the execu tion of te st scripts and docum ents the t est result s for each test scri pt. | ||
| 177 | The SQA Te sting team utilizes the Ration al Quality Managemen t (QM) too l for all testing ac tivities. All test d ocuments a re stored in the EPI P reposito ry, includ ing the Ma ster Test Plan, Test Suites, T est Cases, and Test Scripts. T est execut ion is per formed, an d test res ults recor ded, in Ra tional QM. The Test Engineer a dds the te st results to the Te st Executi on records to indica te whether testing a chieved Pa ss or Fail status. | ||
| 178 | The Test E xecution r ecords for RT*2.0*47 are inclu ded in the EPIP Patc h RT*2.0*4 7 Master T est Plan. The Master Test Plan is availa ble in App endix A. | ||
| 179 | Test Defec t Log | ||
| 180 | The Test D efect Log is a tool for record ing, analy zing, trac king, and documentin g the clos ure of def ects. It s pecifies t he screen, field, be havior or result tha t occurred , and the IEEE-defin ed Severit y Level. I t includes enough in formation for the de veloper to find and re-create the defect . The Defe ct Log is available in Appendi x B. | ||
| 181 | Test Resul ts Summary | ||
| 182 | SQA testin g for this intake st arted in t he Dev1 Go ld1 test e nvironment on June 2 6, 2017 an d ended on July 14, 2017. | ||
| 183 | Test versi on 1 was i nstalled i n the test environme nt on June 26, 2017 after Unit testing i n Dev1 Sil ver1 was c ompleted. Upon compl etion of I ntegration testing ( Component Integratio n and Syst em Testing , Function al Testing , and Regr ession Tes ting), (0) defects w ere found and report ed. | ||
| 184 | Defect Sev erity and Priority L evels | ||
| 185 | A defect i s defined as a flaw in a compo nent or sy stem that can cause the compon ent or sys tem to fai l to perfo rm its req uired func tion, e.g. , an incor rect state ment or da ta definit ion. A def ect, if en countered during exe cution, ma y cause a failure of the compo nent or sy stem. | ||
| 186 | Defects ar e categori zed accord ing to sev erity and priority l evels. The test anal yst assign s the seve rity, whil e the deve lopment ma nager assi gns the pr iority for repair. F or more in formation, see Defec t Severity and Prior ity Defini tion in th is Test Ev aluation. | ||
| 187 | Total Defe cts by Sev erity Leve l | ||
| 188 | The Defect Log in Ap pendix B d isplays th e defects encountere d while te sting this patch, an d the seve rity level of each. | ||
| 189 | Breakdown of Test Re sults | ||
| 190 | Testing wa s complete d on July 14, 2017. All test r esults wer e recorded in Ration al QM. Det ailed resu lts are av ailable in the EPIP Patch RT*2 .0*47 Mast er Test Pl an (see Ap pendix A). | ||
| 191 | Performanc e Testing | ||
| 192 | Performanc e testing was not co nducted. | ||
| 193 | Test Cover age | ||
| 194 | The EPIP P atch RT*2. 0*47 Maste r Test Pla n contains details o n test cov erage (see Appendix A). | ||
| 195 | Requiremen ts Covered | ||
| 196 | The requir ements for RT*2.0*47 are store d in the R ational Re quirements Managemen t (RM) app lication. The test c ases store d in Ratio nal Qualit y Manageme nt (QM) ar e used to validate t hat the re quirements have been addressed , providin g full tra ceability. The user stories st ored in Ra tional Con figuration Managemen t (CM) are linked to the requi rements in RM and te st cases i n QM. | ||
| 197 | The follow ing links provide ac cess to th e various Record_Tra cking repo sitories i n the Rati onal toolk it. If lin k translat ion issues prevent d irect acce ss, copy a nd paste t he URLs in to your br owser. | ||
| 198 | Record Tra cking (RM) – Go to A rtifacts, then Brows e Artifact s. Locate the EPIP f older on t he left si de of the page and e xpand it t o display patch fold ers. Each patch fold er contain s the requ irements f or the pat ch number shown in t he folder name. | ||
| 199 | Record Tra cking (QM) – Go to P lanning, t hen Browse Test Plan s, and the n search f or the Mas ter Test P lan you ne ed. The Ma ster Test Plan and t est cases are linked to requir ements. | ||
| 200 | Record Tra cking (CM) – Go to P lans, then All Plans , and then search fo r the Spri nt Plan yo u need. Th e user sto ries in ea ch Plan ar e linked t o requirem ents and t est cases. | ||
| 201 | Section 50 8 Complian ce Coverag e | ||
| 202 | Section 50 8 test res ults will be reporte d to VA in the follo wing docum ents: | ||
| 203 | EPIP_VASec tion508_Co mpliance_T est_Result s_(RT_2.0_ 47) | ||
| 204 | EPIP_VASec tion508_Co nformance_ Validation _Statement _(RT_2.0_4 7) | ||
| 205 | EPIP_VASec tion508_Ve rifiable_O bjective_E vidence_(R T_2.0_47) | ||
| 206 | Suggested Actions | ||
| 207 | Leidos rec ommends mo ving this patch to I OC testing . | ||
| 208 | Defect Sev erity and Priority D efinitions | ||
| 209 | The classi fication o f defects within a s ystem exam ines both the severi ty and pri ority of t he defect. | ||
| 210 | Severity i s a measur e of how g reat the i mpact is o n the user ’s ability to comple te the doc umented ac tions with in the sys tem. | ||
| 211 | Priority d etermines the speed with which a given d efect must be repair ed. | ||
| 212 | Defect cla ssificatio n may be d etermined either bec ause testi ng is dela yed by a f ailure in the system or becaus e a cumber some worka round prev ents a use r from com pleting th e assigned tasks. Bo th severit y and prio rity measu res must b e recorded when sche duling def ect resolu tion tasks . | ||
| 213 | Defect Sev erity Leve l | ||
| 214 | The follow ing subsec tions iden tify the d efect seve rity level s. | ||
| 215 | Severity L evel 1 – C ritical | ||
| 216 | Institute of Electri cal and El ectronics Engineers (IEEE) def inition: T he defect results in the failu re of the complete s oftware sy stem, of a subsystem , or of a software u nit (progr am or modu le) within the syste m. | ||
| 217 | Any defect that comp romises pa tient safe ty or syst em securit y. Example s of syste m security defects i nclude bre ach of con fidentiali ty require ments of t he Privacy Act, the Health Ins urance Por tability a nd Account ability Ac t (HIPAA), or Federa l Tax Info rmation gu idelines. | ||
| 218 | Loss of sy stem funct ionality c ritical to user oper ations wit h no suita ble workar ound, i.e. , there is no way to achieve t he expecte d results using the applicatio n. | ||
| 219 | System cra sh or hang that prev ents furth er testing or operat ion of the complete applicatio n or a sec tion of th e applicat ion. | ||
| 220 | Any defect that caus es corrupt ion of dat a from a r esult of t he system (as oppose d to user error). | ||
| 221 | Any defect in which inappropri ate transm issions ar e consiste ntly gener ated or ap propriate transmissi ons of HL7 messages fail to be generated . | ||
| 222 | Loss of fu nctionalit y resultin g in erron eous eligi bility/enr ollment de terminatio ns or comm unications not being sent. | ||
| 223 | Severity L evel 2 - H igh | ||
| 224 | IEEE defin ition: The defect re sults in t he failure of the co mplete sof tware syst em, of a s ubsystem, or of a so ftware uni t (program or module ) within t he system. There is no way to make the f ailed comp onent(s) f unction. H owever, th ere are ac ceptable p rocessing alternativ es which w ill yield the desire d result. | ||
| 225 | A major de fect in th e function ality that does not result in corruption of data. | ||
| 226 | A major de fect in th e function ality resu lting in a failure o f all or p art of the applicati on, where: | ||
| 227 | The expect ed results can tempo rarily be achieved b y alternat e means. T he custome r indicate s the work around is acceptabl e for the short term . | ||
| 228 | Any defect that does not confo rm to Sect ion 508 st andards. | ||
| 229 | Any defect that resu lts in ina ccurate or missing r equirement s. | ||
| 230 | Any defect that resu lts in inv alid authe ntication or authent ication of an invali d end user . | ||
| 231 | Severity L evel 3 - M edium | ||
| 232 | IEEE defin ition: The defect do es not res ult in a f ailure, bu t causes t he system to produce incorrect , incomple te, or inc onsistent results, o r the defe ct impairs the syste ms usabili ty. | ||
| 233 | Minor func tionality is not wor king as in tended and a workaro und exists but is no t suitable for long term use | ||
| 234 | The inabil ity of a v alid user to access the system consisten t with gra nted privi leges | ||
| 235 | Typographi cal or gra mmatical e rrors in t he applica tion, incl uding inst allation g uides, use r guides, training m anuals, an d design d ocuments | ||
| 236 | Any defect producing cryptic, incorrect, or inappr opriate er ror messag es | ||
| 237 | Any defect that resu lts from t he use of non-standa rd data te rminology in the app lication o r document ation, as defined by the Depar tment of V eterans Af fairs | ||
| 238 | Cosmetic i ssues that are impor tant to th e integrit y of the p roduct, bu t do not r esult in d ata entry and or dat a quality problems. | ||
| 239 | Severity L evel 4 - L ow | ||
| 240 | IEEE defin ition: The defect do es not cau se a failu re, does n ot impair usability, and the d esired pro cessing re sults are easily obt ained by w orking aro und the de fect. | ||
| 241 | Minor loss of, or de fect in th e function ality wher e a long t erm use ex ists | ||
| 242 | Low-level cosmetic i ssues. | ||
| 243 | Priority C lassificat ions | ||
| 244 | The follow ing subsec tions iden tify the a ppropriate actions f or defects at each p riority le vel, per d efinitions of IEEE. | ||
| 245 | Priority 1 - Resolve Immediate ly | ||
| 246 | Further de velopment and/or tes ting canno t occur un til the de fect has b een repair ed. The sy stem canno t be used until the repair has been affe cted. | ||
| 247 | Priority 2 - Give Hi gh Attenti on | ||
| 248 | The defect must be r esolved as soon as p ossible be cause it i s impairin g developm ent and/or testing a ctivities. System us e will be severely a ffected un til the de fect is fi xed. | ||
| 249 | Priority 3 - Normal Queue | ||
| 250 | The defect should be resolved in the nor mal course of develo pment acti vities. It can wait until a ne w build or version i s created. | ||
| 251 | Priority 4 - Low Pri ority | ||
| 252 | The defect is an irr itant that should be repaired, but can b e repaired after mor e serious defects ha ve been fi xed. | ||
| 253 | Optional T ables, Cha rts, and G raphs | ||
| 254 | None. | ||
| 255 | Document A pproval Si gnatures | ||
| 256 | Signed: __ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ _________ | ||
| 257 | Program/Pr oject Mana ger | ||
| 258 | Date | ||
| 259 | Signed: __ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ _________ | ||
| 260 | Business S ponsor Rep resentativ e | ||
| 261 | Date | ||
| 262 | Signed: __ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ _________ | ||
| 263 | Test Lead | ||
| 264 | Date | ||
| 265 | Appendix A - Test Ex ecution Lo g | ||
| 266 | The Test E xecution R ecords for RT*2.0*47 are inclu ded in the EPIP Patc h RT*2.0*4 7 Master T est Plan. | ||
| 267 | |||
| 268 | Appendix B – Defect Log | ||
| 269 | No defects were foun d during t esting of RT*2.0*47. | ||
| 270 | Defect IDA ffected Sc reenAffect ed FieldOb served Beh aviorSever ityDescrip tionN/AN/A N/AN/AN/AN o defects were found during Un it Testing of versio n 1.0.N/AN /AN/AN/AN/ ANo defect s were fou nd during Component Integratio n/Systems Testing of version 1 .0.N/AN/AN /AN/AN/ANo defects w ere found during Reg ression te sting of v ersion 1.0 .N/AN/AN/A N/AN/ANo d efects wer e found du ring Funct ional Test ing of ver sion 1.0. | ||
| 271 | _156869522 5.pdf |
Araxis Merge (but not the data content of this report) is Copyright © 1993-2016 Araxis Ltd (www.araxis.com). All rights reserved.