Tirsvad
8ef00aafaa
Add RC-001 to RC-005 for the Business Case, Stakeholder Analysis and MIL-001 to MIL-003, checked against their QC checklists, and a traceability matrix. The reviews found a missing duration constraint in the Business Case; BC-001 v2 adds it, and SA-001 v2 records the sign-off. Register RC and TM in the artifact registry. Plan MIL-004 (review the source against QC-PY-001, add a CI workflow) as Proposed, with Business Case objective 6, a Project Plan gateway row and a matrix entry. The milestone is not yet synced to the git host. No issue closed: planning and review documents only, no code changed.
2.5 KiB
2.5 KiB
RC-001 Business Case Review
Metadata
| Key | Value |
|---|---|
| ID | RC-001 |
| CrossReference | BC-001, QC-BC-001 |
Version History
| Date | Status | Author | Reviewer | Change | Commit |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-10-06 | Proposed | Jens Tirsvad Nielsen | S01 | Initial version | pending |
Artifact Under Review
- Instance reviewed: BC-001 (docs/business-case.md)
- Checklist used: QC-BC-001 (
QC-BC-001) - Independence: S01 is the only stakeholder and is also the recorded author, so the reviewer-is-not-author rule cannot be met. The documents were drafted by Claude on S01's behalf; S01 reviews and signs. This is a known limit of a one-person project, not a clean independent review.
Checklist Results
| # | Criterion | Status | Evidence/Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | ROI/Cost-Benefit analysis is quantitative, or where qualitative, is explicitly justified | Pass | Cost-Benefit table is explicitly qualitative and says why (no money involved). |
| 2 | Risks are identified with documented impact and mitigation | Pass | Three risks, each with impact and mitigation. |
| 3 | Success criteria are measurable, stating explicit targets rather than vague aspirations | Pass | Five criteria with targets and a measure each. |
| 4 | Scope explicitly separates In Scope vs Out of Scope | Pass | ### In Scope and ### Out of Scope are separate. |
| 5 | Stakeholders are cross-referenced to Stakeholder Analysis IDs rather than re-described inline | Pass | Stakeholders table cites S01 to S03 only; no roles are re-described. |
| 6 | Methodology and quality-standard foundation are stated explicitly (e.g. ISO/IEC 25010, Larman) | Pass | Methodology section names the framework, ISO/IEC 25010:2023 and the coding conventions. |
| 7 | Assumptions and constraints are explicit and clearly distinguished from one another | Pass | Fixed in v2: the first draft had no duration, although MIL-001 to MIL-003 and PP-001 cite one. Constraints now state 2026-10-05 to 2026-10-12. |
| 8 | Document supports executive decision-making with a clear, unambiguous recommendation | Pass | Recommendation is a single "Proceed" with a reason. |
Overall Verdict
Go — all mandatory criteria pass. Criterion 7 first failed (missing duration constraint) and was fixed in the same change as BC-001 v2.
Action Items
| Action | Owner | Due |
|---|---|---|
| Add the duration constraint to BC-001 (done in v2) | S01 | 2026-10-06 |