Sprint 2 Retrospective

Kane

Good: He thinks the best thing he did this sprint was getting us up to speed with documentation. It was lacking and he spent a lot of time making it more comprehensive. He went through all the code and made sure it was well commented. Also created pages in the github and a number of different diagrams.
Bad: The scope of the project is limiting teamwork in that the issues are small enough they can be resolved individually without needing to consult the group.

Good: Communication was really good between the group. Everyone was working well together in providing help. Specifically Joel and James with the front end and backend changes and assisting Jordan with getting up to speed with the technical proficiency required to contribute to the project.
Bad: The flow of the application could be clearer. The way information is passed around through the app was unclear to those unfamiliar with the way that it works, ie, those that wrote it initially. Better documentation would help to resolve this.

Good: During this sprint we did better at tying our goals and individual tasks back to the requirements analysis. We were better at using the user stories to influence our choice of features to implement and to motivate our actions.
Bad: The project is done more in individual bursts rather than a collaborative process. Most of the cooperation on individual parts happens during the workshop and things are often created by one individual.

Good: Happy with how the product has turned out. The backend and the front end are much cleaner and the product is much easier to extend and maintain.
Bad: We weren't as good at reviewing each others code before merges were made.