The quality of software requires constant attention.
GVB is a Dutch public transport company. It contributes to accessibility, quality of life and mobility for people in Amsterdam and the surrounding area. Responsibilities include taking care of the journey, management and maintenance of the rails and vehicles. Well-performing software is essential for this to work properly and safely. BonCode was asked during the development of new software for the Exploitation Management System (EBS) to regularly conduct independent Code Reviews and objectively measure and assess the quality of the software.
The EBS is outdated and needs updating. That is why the EBS Renewal program was started to provide optimum support to the CCV (Communication Center for Transport) in monitoring and adjust daily operations and providing up-to-date and reliable (travel) information. The bus and tram drivers are also better supported and informed about the implementation of the operation. As part of the EBS Renewal program, drivers are given a new and more comprehensive operating system in the vehicle. This system has functions such as; person logging in, trip logging in, checkout, driving table and mobile phone. Via the operating screen it will be visible, among other things, what time the vehicle must be at a certain stop, the driver can better follow the punctuality and he can also operate the mobile phone. The EBS System in the vehicles runs on a generic infrastructure (hardware and software). The development of that generic infrastructure is also part of the program.
In a conversation with Remko Zuidgeest, program manager EBS Renewal, and Jochem Sobering, Principle within Ximedes and software supplier for GVB, we ask about the progress of the collaboration and the results achieved with BonCode.
Measuring code and software quality
“The reason for the Code Reviews was twofold,” says Remko. “First of all, there is a formal reason. As the responsible program manager, I was asked to have independent tests and tests carried out on GVB software. It is the wish of GVB, and also of myself, to have more certainty about the quality of the software. It provides comfort in an area that the organization and I have too little knowledge of. There are plenty of specialists here, but there is no internal expertise for measuring code quality. “
Cooperation with BonCode
“The requirement for an independent Code Review has brought us to BonCode, a company that is specialized in these kinds of challenges. Prior contact was extensive, and the right feeling by the proposed approach was created. “Jochem:” Measuring the quality of the software has given us new insights. Not shocking, since we also monitor ourselves, but with what we can do something. It is nice to work with a party that periodically takes measurements, thinks along and provides proposals for improvement. That way you can improve the quality of the code together and optimize the end product for the customer. Ultimately, a good and definitive report was issued to GVB. “
“It is nice to work with a party that periodically takes measurements, thinks along and makes proposals for improvement. That way you can improve the quality of the code together and optimize the end product for the customer”.
Quality of code
Remko continues: “Through the collaboration with BonCode we fill a gap with specific knowledge and expertise. The validation sessions provide extra insight. Then you look together at the conclusion and points for improvement. This has been discussed in advance and has paid off. A common thread can be drawn between the various measurements. You see parts that score well and less well. Does this provide sufficient comfort? We test the software in all kinds of ways. Through objective measurements, we now know that the quality of the code is good. It provides a peace of mind on that domain. “
Stability and scalability
“Another important point is that the complexity and interdependence of the services within the software has decreased. This was set up too complex in the start-up phase. Even the experts experienced this as complicated. Now the architecture has been improved significantly and the components are more independent. This considerably increases the stability and scalability of the application. “
“BonCode has mapped out these insights. Then you talk about it, give it attention and come up with solutions. There are nuances in those solutions. With BonCode it is possible to look at a problem from different perspectives. That is better than working from a fixed standard without taking the context into account. I find it less pleasant to work without taking the context into account”, says Remko. Jochem agrees: “Sometimes discussions arise, where it is not necessarily good or bad. Everyone has their view. Then it is nice to be able to consult with specialists. “
“With BonCode it is possible to look at a problem from different perspectives.”
Jochem continues: “Ultimately, it’s about reliable software. I have also experienced that we had to raise the quality score, even though we did not agree with the changes. It was a goal in itself. This is not the way BonCode works and we find this a lot more pleasant as we can consult together”.
“The transparent and consistent working method of BonCode provides clear results and reports. As a result, you can quickly see whether quick wins can be achieved and whether your software meets the standard at all”, says Remko. “GVB continues to develop the software continuously. Periodic Code Reviews, therefore, remain necessary. “Remko continues:” We are very satisfied with BonCode. They have a pleasant way of working together, deliver concrete and clear reports and are open to substantive discussions”. Both gentlemen are unanimous in the final score. A big 8.5.
Do you also want an independent Code Review? Contact BonCode for a suitable quotation.