Extending the ATAM architecture evaluation to product line architectures

Proceedings - 5th Working IEEE/IFIP Conference on Software Architecture, WICSA 2005

Volumn 2005, Issue , 2005, Pages 45-56

  Olumofin, Femi G ^a   Mišić, Vojislav B ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MANITOBA   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER AIDED SOFTWARE ENGINEERING; PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT; SOFTWARE DESIGN;

ARCHITECTURE TRADEOFF ANALYSIS METHOD (ATAM); SOFTWARE PRODUCT;

SOFTWARE ARCHITECTURE;

EID: 33750552785     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1109/WICSA.2005.33     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (16)

1. M. Barbacci, P. Clements, A. Lattanze, L. Northrop, and W. Wood. Using the Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method (ATAM) to evaluate the software architecture for a product line of avionics systems: A case study. CMU SEI Technical Note CMU/SEI-2003-TN-012, Software Engineering Institue, Pittsburgh, PA, 2003.
2. L. Bass, P. Clements, and R. Kazman. Software Architecture in Practice. The SEI Series in Software Engineering. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, 2nd edition, 2002.
3. J. Bayer, Anastasopoulos, C. Gacek, and O. Flege. A process for product line architecture creation and evaluation: PuLSE-DSSA version 2.0. Technical Report No.038.00/E, Fraunhofer IESE, Kaiserslautern, Germany, June 2000.
4. M. B. Chrissis, M. Konrad, and S. Shrum. CMMI: Guide-lines for Process Integration and Product Improvement. The SEI Series in Software Engineering. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, 2003.
5. P. Clements, R. Kazman, and M. Klein. Evaluating Software Architectures - Methods and Case Studies. The SEI Series in Software Engineering. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, 2002.
6. P. Clements and L. Northrop. Software Product Lines. The SEI Series in Software Engineering. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, 2002.
7. L. Dobrica and E. Niemelä. A strategy for analyzing product line software architectures. Technical Report VTT-PUBS-427, VTT Electronics, Oulu, Finland, 2000.
8. R. Kazman, G. Abowd, L. Bass, and P. Clements. Scenario-based analysis of software architecture. IEEE Software, 13(6):47-55, 1996.
9. R. Kazman, L. Bass, M. Webb, and G. Abowd. SAAM: a method for analyzing the properties of software architectures. In ICSE '94: Proc. 16th Int. Conf. Software Engineering, pages 81-90, Sorrento, Italy, 1994.
10. R. Kazman, M. Klein, and P. Clements. ATAM: Method for architecture evaluation. CMU SEI Technical Note CMU/SEI-2000-TR-004, ADA382629, Software Engineering Institue, Pittsburgh, PA, 2000.
11. R. Kazman, P. Kruchten, R. L. Nord, and J. E. Tomayko. Integrating software-architecture-centric methods into the Rational Unified Process. CMU SEI Technical Note CMU/SEI2004-TR-011, Software Engineering Institue, Pittsburgh, PA, 2004.
12. E. Niemelä, M. Matinlassi, and A. Taulavuori. Practical evaluation of software product family architectures. In Proc. Third Software Product Line Conference SPLC 2004, pages 130-145, Boston, MA, Aug/Sep 2004.
13. D. L. Parnas. Designing software for ease of extension and contraction. In ICSE '78: Proc. 3rd Int. Conf. Software engineering, pages 264-277, Atlanta, GA, 1978.
14. The Product Line Systems Program of the Software Engineering Institute, Luminary Software and Clemson University Dept of Computer Science. Arcade Game Maker Product Line, 2004. available at http://www.cs.clemson.edu/ ~johnmc/.
15. Rational Corp., Cupertino, CA. Rational Unified Process, 2001.
16. F. van der Linden, J. Bosch, E. Kamsties, K. Känsälä, and J. H. Obbink. Software product family evaluation. In Proc. Third Software Product Line Conference SPLC 2004, pages 110-129, Boston, MA, Aug/Sep 2004.