we have a chat bot that seems to be receiving messages from another bot. we'd like to ignore these messages, as responding to them leads to an infinite loop of ping pong between the two bots.
we were hoping to rely on activity.from.role as documented here, but it seems like that field is never set.
activity.from.id looks something like 28:app:00000000-dfae-4fe1-a068-80fe8fc61f2b_62b732f7-fc71-40bc-b27d-35efcb000000, and we are thinking that the only way to identify the account as a bot is by detecting the :app: in these IDs. this is sub-optimal, as this ID format is not part of the official API and could change at any time.
that said, how should we detect if an activity event is coming from a bot?
If you've to deal with potential bots from outside your organisation, a simple way could be to keep a dictionary of few last text exchanges indexed by userId or UserName in the Activity object. Then, at each POST received by your bot, check if the received text match fully one of the precedent message entries in this dictionary. If it is the case, then mark the related userId/UserName as a candidate for the bot role but continue to check further text exchanges in case a non bot user just said hi twice.
If the few following further exchanges doesn't meet anymore the full match requirement, unmark the userId/UserName as a potential bot. If there is marked UserId/UserName as candidate for bot role, apply the bot role to them if there's no more further exchanges past the full match entry or after a delay of your choice. For the latter, it might be useful to provoke a last text exchange after the delay to decide.
For the Watson/Eliza kind of bots, i recommended to check the speed of the exchanges, as far as i know, no human being can exchange more than twenty messages per second.
The team I manage has been using TFS for years, but we've used a 3rd party system for tracking bugs and features. I'm looking to upgrade our team into TFS 2013 and I've done tons of reading and research into how TFS manages work items, backlogs, iterations, tasks etc. And although I understand the principles of what 'can' be done, I'm having a hard time visualizing 'how' our team would work with these work items as tasks.
If anyone knows of any best practice guides for actual sample based usage, or can answer any of these questions that'd be great
1) Product backlog - Under the 'configure schedule and iterations' what is the concept for setting the current 'backlog iteration'? Our team uses short 2 week iterations with a build number, but setting the build iteration as the current backlog makes all new PBI's scoped to only that iteration. Any items not complete in that iteration would disappear once I set the current build to the next iteration number. On the other hand, if I set it to the parent root node, I could see the PBI list getting rather large over time. What is the best method for managing PBI's that are unassigned and working in a simple Parent->build1/build2 etc structure?
2) Features - So I create a feature, perhaps it spans many work items and several tasks. They get completed over time, but I've noticed there's no 'auto' complete or status updates on parent items. So who/when is a Feature item supposed to get marked complete? If the product owner is supposed to use the features list to get an overview of work, they have no idea if all the dependent items have been complete and when to mark the feature Done.
3) Work Items - Managing these, and in particular their 'state' or status seems like a royal pain. On the task board you can't change their state, only their tasks with drag-drop, which is nice. But you complete all the tasks, and the parent work item stays in status 'New'. Do you really have to micro-manage every work item, open it up, and set the state to Done?
4) QA/testing - For every work item, each team member is responsible for testing each item, so every item is tested by multiple people, and logging any issues found. What's the best way to use work items or tasks for this?
5) Build Complete - Once every work item in the iteration is marked Done then I assume they are removed from the product backlog correct? The exception to this seems to be the features they were tied to, the feature item itself remains open. How do stakeholders view a list of features that were completed in the current build?
I can't answer everything (indeed, there is no one "right" answer), but here's how my team uses TFS - it might give you some ideas:
We use Area Path to represent a Project or Epic that work belongs under. When a work item is created it is assigned to a project using the Area Path, and it never changes.
Then to represent "when" work is done we use a hierarchical iteration path under 3 headings (for a project called "Project"): Project\Completed, Project\Current, Project\Future.
Stories in the product backlog are initially assigned to Future (We go a bit further in fact and use New stories to represent "proposed" work, and Active ones to represent the "approved" backlog - this allows us to plan tentative projects/contracts that convert into real work when they get the green light). At this stage we do Planning Poker to get Story Points and then the Project Managers assign stack ranks to the stories to help to decide what to move from Proposed to Product backlog, and then eventually what we should think about for the next iteration.
When we start an iteration we create a new iteration (call it 001) under Future, i.e. Project\Future\001. Then Stories are chosen from the Product Backlog for implementation - they get assigned to this iteration. When the iteration is ready to start, we use a "conveyor belt" approach which moves all the iterations along one "place" in the hierarchy: In the Iteration Path configuration UI, just drag the 001 iteration from Future to Current. This re-paths everything in that path automatically so that all the active work is instantly under Project\Current.
As we complete the iteration, we would have Current\001 and we'd then add Future\002. Then we move 001 and 002 along the conveyor (to Project\Completed\001 and Project\Current\002 respectively). This way the work gets assigned to one iteration and stays there, but the iteration as a whole moves from future ...to current ...to completed. This allows us to build queries like "all current work" (all work under "Project\Current") that we don't need to rewrite for every iteration, and this saves a massive amount of time and eliminates a lot of mistakes trying to re-assign iteration paths constantly - in most cases the iteration is only changed once (from future to an actual iteration).
When a story moves into the current iteration, we choose an implementing team (e.g. an owner to accept delivery, and a developer and a tester to implement the work) and those people add tasks for any work that needs to be done to deliver the story. Any bugs/issues that crop up for that story during the iteration are also parented to the Story or Tasks.
We found the TFS tools pretty poor (clumsy, slow, micro-managing), so we now use a home-built dashboard that shows us a list of stories, so in our scrum we can step through the stories and see the tasks/bugs/issues for each, who is working on them, and how much work they reported on the task since the last scrum. This gives us a really clear basis to discuss the story.
We close tasks/bugs/issues as we complete them, but the story stays open till the end of the iteration (so that any new bugs found can be attached and dealt with). We then use a custom tool to "Resolve" the story, which closes all the child work items, and then checks if the parent Feature or Epic is now completed and can also be marked "Resolved". This can also be done in stock TFS just using a manual process, but it is rather laborious, and the code to automate it is only an hour or two's work. I really don't understand why TFS makes you essentially update all the database tables by hand when it's so easy to automate. (In a similar way, the TFS kanban is unnecessarily time consuming to manage because items only appear on it if they are perfectly formed - get any of the estimate, remaining, completed, area, iteration, assigned-to, parent link, etc wrong and it vanishes! So I've written e.g. a simple 'create task' tool that asks for the estimate, assignee and title, and fill in the rest - this took me a couple of hours to implement and has eradicated all the time consuming errors and hassle of using TFS 'raw')
When processing tasks, TFS provides 'Activity' states (planning, development, testing, documentation etc) - which implies that each single task will be passed linearly through a chain of different people to be implemented... but we feel this is a poor approach, because we want to encourage the team working on a story to work in parallel and work together, not "throw their bit over the fence to the next guy". So instead each person on the team creates one or more tasks under the story that represent the parcels of work (programming, testing, documenting) they must personally do to deliver the story, and each task only ever has one owner. (This works well in our scrum dashboard because it shows the story and its list of child tasks/bugs/issues, so the entire context of the story's work can be seen easily at a glance). The separate tasks allow the programmer and tester to work together in a tight, iterative, co-operative agile loop, often with progressive roll-out of parts of the feature for testing, rather than the programmer finishing all his work before passing the complete article over to the tester in a waterfall-y way. At the end of the iteration, the story-team demos their story to the wider development team, and they are all equally responsible for ensuring that everything needed is delivered. After the demo, the Product Owner/Champion then accepts the work as done (or rejects it). This vastly reduces the amount of work that gets dropped "between the cracks" where people think somebody else will do it, helping us to get to a solid delivery at the end. We've found communication within the team and story delivery significantly improved since we moved to this approach.
I should mention that to get good estimates and burn-downs we try to keep each task less than 5 days work, and to avoid micro-management we try to avoid splitting down tasks into anything under about 2 days (though obviously some tasks are necessarily shorter).
As I've mentioned, we log bugs/issues as children of the task or story they affect (and can also add Related links if they impact more than one story). At the end of the iteration as well as demoing the new features to the rest of the team, the release build is regression-tested as a whole. Any bugs found are fixed in a release branch and within (hopefully) a day or two we have a stable customer release. We aim to have a product of customer-releasable quality from every iteration, and to keep the number of outstanding bugs per developer below 5 (usually 1-3). Before introducing this system, we had an ongoing average of 20 bugs per developer, an unpleasant technical debt. (Note: we reserve some time in every iteration for fixing these bugs, but when bugs are too gnarly to fix then-and-there, we usually convert them into new stories so that they can be estimated and scheduled for a future iteration just like other work, so the bug-list and technical debt is never allowed to build up, and where possible bug fixing is not allowed to derail our iteration plan.
We don't treat work in progress (items in an iteration) as Product Backlog - the product backlog is work that we plan to do in the future, and when it moves into an iteration it becomes actively worked on and no longer in the "to do" list (it's the Iteration backlog, not the Product backlog). When all of the work (task/bug) is complete, then the parent story can be Resolved ('we think it is "done"') and then Closed ('the Product Owner accepts it as "done"') and so a simple query (work under Project\Current that is Closed) will tell you what you have delivered this iteration.
Lastly when we close out the iteration, the whole iteration moves into Project\Completed, so then you can easily query all of the work which has ever been completed (under Project\Completed), and still grouped within their individual iterations. So at any time if you want to know what "Build 107" added, you can just do a query for all Closed stories under iteration path Project\Completed\107. We mark incomplete/abandoned work as Removed, so for us Closed means "Done". If work is not completed in one iteration and is continued in the next, then we simply move the story to the next iteration, and so the completed work then shows up in any queries for "Build 108" instead - so this perfectly tracks the achieved deliveries for an iteration.
To keep things consistent, only a few team members can change different types of item. So our "planning items" (Epics, Features, Stories) are only changed by the Project Manager or Product Owners. Tasks are all owned and thus created/changed/closed by the developer that is doing the work. PMs track progress of stories and devs track progress of tasks.
1) Product backlog - Under the 'configure schedule and iterations'
what is the concept for setting the current 'backlog iteration'? Our
team uses short 2 week iterations with a build number, but setting the
build iteration as the current backlog makes all new PBI's scoped to
only that iteration. Any items not complete in that iteration would
disappear once I set the current build to the next iteration number.
On the other hand, if I set it to the parent root node, I could see
the PBI list getting rather large over time. What is the best method
for managing PBI's that are unassigned and working in a simple
Parent->build1/build2 etc structure?
TFS has two different backlogs. The Product Backlog of your team and the Sprint backlog of your team. In the iteration configuration screen you define which iteration contains your teams product backlog (by setting the Backlog iteration) and which iterations below that will represent your sprints .
If you have a large list of PBI's you could put these either in an iteration above the current backlog iteration, which will effectively hide them from the backlog pages. Or you can place them in a separate iteration that is a sibbling of your Backlog iteration.
2) Features - So I create a feature, perhaps it spans many work items
and several tasks. They get completed over time, but I've noticed
there's no 'auto' complete or status updates on parent items. So
who/when is a Feature item supposed to get marked complete? If the
product owner is supposed to use the features list to get an overview
of work, they have no idea if all the dependent items have been
complete and when to mark the feature Done.
There is no auto-complete or auto-close. Normally the Product Owner (scrum role) will keep an eye out on what he has requested and knows just about when a feature is about to be completed.
You can also view the hierarchy of Product backlog items to features in the Product Backlog view by selecting the Features to Backlog Items view. This will also list the states of the underlying stories:
3) Work Items - Managing these, and in particular their 'state' or
status seems like a royal pain. On the task board you can't change
their state, only their tasks with drag-drop, which is nice. But you
complete all the tasks, and the parent work item stays in status
'New'. Do you really have to micro-manage every work item, open it up,
and set the state to Done?
Normally the product owner/project manager will approve stories for pickup and move them from new to approved. Then during the Sprint planning meeting (or at the start of a sprint), the team selects which items they will work on and will move these from Approved to Committed.
Then at the end of the sprint (or when all tasks under a story are done), the development team shows the product owner the finished work and then moves the story to done as well.
4) QA/testing - For every work item, each team member is responsible
for testing each item, so every item is tested by multiple people, and
logging any issues found. What's the best way to use work items or
tasks for this?
Depends on the maturity of the team. And depends on your adoption of Test manager (Test Case work item). If your team is pretty mature and is using Test manager to link Test Cases to your Stories, then you can view the status of your tests in Web Access. If the team consistently works in a ATDD way of working, they'll do the work needed to make a test succeed before moving on to the next piece of work. In such a workflow it's not really needed to create "design-build-test" work items. The work item would probably be akin to "Make test X pass" and would include all the work to create the test, build the code and make the test pass.
5) Build Complete - Once every work item in the iteration is marked
Done then I assume they are removed from the product backlog correct?
The exception to this seems to be the features they were tied to, the
feature item itself remains open. How do stakeholders view a list of
features that were completed in the current build?
Again, use the Feature to Product Backlog Item view to see which features have had all their work finished. The stakeholders mentally verify that this was indeed all they wanted and that they have no additional requests, work, feedback that is needed to truly complete the feature. If this is the case they will close the feature by moving it to done.
In Google Play Game Services, can I define a quest that require multiple events to be accord in order to get the reword?
The Completion Criteria description says:
How Play Games determines if the quest is completed. This consists of
an event (which you can enter by name), and the number of times the
event must occur to complete this criteria (for example, “Kill Zombie”
100 times).
It sounds like it's not possible, but it's not really clear.
https://developers.google.com/games/services/common/concepts/quests
"In the quest definition, specify the events that represent player actions or milestones needed to complete the quest."
That made me think it's possible... but:
The Quest object has a method called getCurrentMilestone()
https://developer.android.com/reference/com/google/android/gms/games/quest/Quest.html#getCurrentMilestone()
The Milestone class only has information for a single event.
https://developer.android.com/reference/com/google/android/gms/games/quest/Milestone.html
So I think the answer is no.
What happens, if I send multiple ShellToast notifications from background agent at once, for example in ToDo list app I want to notify that 3 tasks should be finished today?
Is it allowed or recommended? Would the user see all three toasts or only the first one?
The scheduled agent only runs once and it's up to you to manage which toast will be shown. In those scenarios you should be using a counter...possibly.
The way I've worked around this sort of thing in the past is just track a time or which toasts have been shown in sort of a queue and just show one every update so you could just rotate through your queue throughout the day until the tasks in app are no longer valid. Or, based on the phone's time, determine what to show (they fire every 30 min or so).
Ultimately, the optimal way is probably having one toast that says "You have 3 tasks to complete" etc etc.
Hope one of those solutions might help!
// Jed
suppose we have the following scenario:
2 users both signal ready to play, the rails app receives it and starts a game
one of the 2 users issue a "forfeit" via ajax immediately (im assuming it's not possible to prevent that, amirite?)
by the time the other user polls to figure out whether a game has started, the game has already ended and scores updated
that user is confused
I'm not quite sure what to do here. Can anyone give me some ideas?
Alright, I figured out what I did wrong. (cant self answer yet because my rep is too low)
When a user polls to figure out whether his/her game has started, and to receive moves and etc, I check "game in progress" and "user = user polling" attributes to figure out what to respond. But that's wrong, because as soon as the ends, this logic fails to find the relevant game to retrieve data from and give back to the user.
What I'm think of right now is, add "end game has been polled" as an attribute to the game object (well, playing objects through relationships) so if a game ended but has not been polled, the user will receive it once then respond to confirm. Then the game will not be polled again.
The flag indicating the game has ended should allow for different values indicating why the game ended. When player 1 forfeits, the flag is updated to indicate forfeiture. Then when player 2 polls to get status, he is told of the forfeiture.
Alright, I figured out what I did wrong.
When a user polls to figure out whether his/her game has started, and to receive moves and etc, I check "game in progress" and "user = user polling" attributes to figure out what to respond. But that's wrong, because as soon as the ends, this logic fails to find the relevant game to retrieve data from and give back to the user.
What I'm think of right now is, add "end game has been polled" as an attribute to the game object (well, playing objects through relationships) so if a game ended but has not been polled, the user will receive it once then respond to confirm. Then the game will not be polled again.
However, there is now a new question, as in what if there are multiple state changes in-between polls.
Maybe polling for state is just wrong? Perhaps I need a buffer queue that records state changes in order for polling? I don't know yet.