Evaluation of quality attribute variability in software product families

Proceedings - Fifteenth IEEE International Conference and Workshops on the Engineering of Computer-Based Systems, ECBS 2008

Volumn , Issue , 2008, Pages 255-264

  Etxeberria, Leire ^a   Sagardui, Goiuria ^a  

^a MONDRAGON UNIVERSITY   (Spain)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DOMAIN ENGINEERING; SOFTWARE PRODUCT LINE ENGINEERING;

COST EFFECTIVENESS; FUNCTIONAL ANALYSIS; QUALITY OF SERVICE; SOFTWARE RELIABILITY;

SOFTWARE ENGINEERING;

EID: 44149087159     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1109/ECBS.2008.14     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (41)

1. Marko Auerswald, Martin Herrmann, Stefan Kowalewski, and Vincent Schulte-Coerne. Reliability-oriented product line engineering of embedded systems. In PFE '01: Revised Papers from the 4th International Workshop on Software Product-Family Engineering, pages 83-100, London, UK, 2002. Springer-Verlag.
2. Don S. Batory. Feature models, grammars, and prepositional formulas. In J. Henk Obbink and Klaus Pohl, editors, 9th International Conference on Software Product Lines, SPLC, Proceedings, volume 3714 of LNCS, pages 7-20. Springer, 2005.
3. David Benavides, Pablo Trinidad, and Antonio Ruiz-Cortés. Automated reasoning on feature models. In Oscar Pastor and João Falcão e Cunha, editors, Advanced Information Systems Engineering, 17th International Conference, CAiSE, Proceedings, volume 3520 of LNCS, pages 491-503. Springer, 2005.
4. Olof Bengtsson and Jan Bosch. Architecture level prediction of software maintenance. In CSMR '99: Proceedings of the Third European Conference on Software Maintenance and Reengineering, page 139, Washington, DC, USA, 1999. IEEE Computer Society.
5. P. Bengtsson and J. Bosch. Scenario-based software architecture reengineering. In ICSR '98: Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Software Reuse, page 308, Washington, DC, USA, 1998. IEEE Computer Society.
6. PerOlof Bengtsson, Nico Lassing, Jan Bosch, and Hans van Vliet. Architecture-level modifiability analysis (alma). J. Syst. Softw., 69(1-2): 129-147, 2004.
7. Lawrence Chung, Brian A. Nixon, Eric Yu, and John Mylopoulos. Non-Functional Requirements in Software Engineering (The Kluwer International Series in Software Engineering Volume 5). Springer, October 1999.
8. Paul Clements, Rick Kazman, and Mark Klein. Evaluating Software Architectures: Methods and Case Studies. Addison-Wesley Professional, January 2002.
9. Paul Clements and Linda Northrop. Software Product Lines: Practices and Patterns. Addison-Wesley Professional, August 2001.
10. Krzysztof Czarnecki and Ulrich Eisenecker. Generative Programming: Methods, Tools, and Applications. Addison-Wesley Professional, June 2000.
11. Krzysztof Czarnecki, Simon Helsen, and Ulrich W. Eisenecker. Formalizing cardinality-based feature models and their specialization. Software Process: Improvement and Practice, 10(1): 7-29, 2005.
12. Sybren Deelstra, Marco Sinnema, Jos Nijhuis, and Jan Bosch. Cosvam: A technique for assessing software variability in software product families. In ICSM '04: Proceedings of the 20th IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance, pages 458-462, Washington, DC, USA, 2004. IEEE Computer Society.
13. Thomas J. Dolan. Architecture Assessment of Information-System Families: a practical perspective. PhD thesis, Tech. Univ. Eindhoven, Netherlands, 2001.
14. Leire Etxeberria and Goiuria Sagardui. Product-line architecture: New issues for evaluation. In J. Henk Obbink and Klaus Pohl, editors, 9th International Conference on Software Product Lines, SPLC, Proceedings, volume 3714 of LNCS, pages 174-185. Springer, 2005.
15. Leire Etxeberria, Goiuria Sagardui, and Lorea Belategi. Modelling variation in quality attributes. In Klauss Pohl, Pratrick Heymans, Kyo-Chul Kang, and Andreas Metzger, editors, First International Workshop on Variability of Software-Intensive Systems (VaMos 2007), volume Lero Technical report 2007-1. Lero, 2007.
16. Stefan Ferber, Peter Heidl, and Peter Lutz. Reviewing product line architectures: Experience report of atam in an automotive context. In PFE '01: Revised Papers from the 4th International Workshop on Software Product-Family Engineering, pages 364-382, London, UK, 2002. Springer-Verlag.
17. E. Folmer, J. Gurp, and J. Bosch. Scenario-based assessment of software architecture usability. In Proceedings of Workshop on Bridging the Gaps Between Software Engineering and Human-Computer Interaction, ICSE, Portland, 2003.
18. Brian P. Gallagher. Using the architecture tradeoff analysis method to evaluate a reference architecture: A case study. Technical Report CMU/SEI-2000-TN-007, SEI, 2000.
19. Gerald C. Gannod and Robyn R. Lutz. An approach to architectural analysis of product lines. In ICSE '00: Proceedings of the 22nd international conference on Software engineering, pages 548-557, New York, NY, USA, 2000. ACM Press.
20. Bruno González-Baixauli, Miguel A. Laguna, and Yania Crespo. Product line requirements based on goals, features and use cases. In International Workshop on Requirements Reuse in System Family Engineering (IWREQFAM), pages 4-7, jun 2004.
21. Bas Graaf, Hylke van Dijk, and Arie van Deursen. Evaluating an embedded software reference architecture " industrial experience report ". In CSMR '05: Proceedings of the Ninth European Conference on Software Maintenance and Reengineering, pages 354-363, Washington, DC, USA, 2005. IEEE Computer Society.
22. M. Griss, J. Favaro, and M. d'Alessandro. Integrating feature modeling with the rseb. In 5th International Conference on Software Reuse, ICSR 1998, pages 76-85, Vancouver, BC, Canada, jun 1998.
23. Günter Halmans and Klaus Pohl. Communicating the variability of a software-product family to customers. Software and System Modeling, 2(l):15-36, 2003.
24. Anne Immonen. Software Product Lines, Research Issues in Engineering and Management, chapter A Method for Predicting Reliability and Availability at the Architecture Level, pages 373-422. Springer, 2006.
25. S. Jarzabek, B. Yang, and S. Yoeun. Addressing quality attributes in domain analysis for product lines. IEE Proceedings - Software, 153(2):61-73, 2006.
26. K. Kang, S.Cohen, J.Hess, W.Novak, and S. Peterson. Feature-oriented domain analysis (foda) feasibility study. Technical Report CMU/SEI-90-TR-21, November 1990.
27. Kyo C. Kang, Sajoong Kim, Jaejoon Lee, Kijoo Kim, Euiseob Shin, and Moonhang Huh. Form: A feature-oriented reuse method with domain-specific reference architectures. Ann. Softw. Eng., 5:143-168, 1998.
28. Mika Korhonen and Tommi Mikkonen. Assessing systems adaptability to a product family. J. Syst. Archit., 50(7):383-392, 2004.
29. Alessandro Maccari. Experiences in assessing product family software architecture for evolution. In ICSE '02: Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Software Engineering, pages 585-592, New York, NY, USA, 2002. ACM Press.
30. Mari Matinlassi, Eila Niemelä, and Liliana Dobrica. Quality-driven architecture design and quality analysis method: A revolutionary initiation approach to a product line architecture. Technical Report VTT-PUBS-456, VTT Electronics, jan 2002.
31. Varvana Myllärniemi, Tomi Männistö, and Mikko Raatikainen. Quality attribute variability within a software product family architecture. In 2nd International Conference on the Quality of Software Architectures (QoSA), 2006.
32. Eila Niemelä. Architecture centric software family engineering, product family engineering seminar. Tutorial in 5th Working IEEE/IFIP Conference on Software Architecture (WICSA), 2005.
33. FemiG. Olumofin and Vojislav B. Misie. Extending the atam architecture evaluation to product line architectures. In WICSA '05: Proceedings of the 5th Working IEEE/IFIP Conference on Software Architecture (WICSA'05), pages 45-56, Washington, DC, USA, 2005. IEEE Computer Society.
34. Claudio Riva and Christian Del Rosso. Experiences with software product family evolution. In IWPSE '03: Proceedings of the 6th International Workshop on Principles of Software Evolution, page 161, Washington, DC, USA, 2003. IEEE Computer Society.
35. SEI. Arcade game maker pedagogical product line. Arcade Game Maker Pedagogical Product Line. Web page: http://www.sei.cmu.edu/productlines/ppl/ index.html.
36. Marco Sinnema, Sybren Deelstra, Jos Nijhuis, and Jan Bosch. Covamof: A framework for modeling variability in software product families. In Robert L. Nord, editor, 3rd International Conference on Software Product Lines, SPLC, Proceedings, volume 3154 of LNCS, pages 197-213. Springer, sep 2004.
37. Connie U. Smith and Lloyd G. Williams. Performance solutions: a practical guide to creating responsive, scalable software. Addison Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc., Redwood City, CA, USA, 2002.
38. Christoph Stoermer, Felix Bachmann, and Chris Verhoef. Sacam: The software architecture comparison analysis method. Technical Report CMU/SEI-2003-TR-006, SEI, 2003.
39. Jan Gerben Wijnstra. Evolving a product family in a changing context. In Frank van der Linden, editor, Software Product-Family Engineering, 5th International Workshop, PFE, Revised Papers, volume 3014 of LNCS, pages 111-128. Springer, 2003.
40. Lloyd G. Williams and Connie U. Smith. Pasa: a method for the performance assessment of software architectures. In WOSP '02: Proceedings of the 3rd international workshop on Software and performance, pages 179-189, New York, NY, USA, 2002. ACM Press.
41. Hongyu Zhang, Stan Jarzabek, and Bo Yang. Quality prediction and assessment for product lines. In Johann Eder and Michele Missikoff, editors, 15th International Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering, CAiSE, Proceedings, volume 2681 of LNCS, pages 681-695. Springer, 2003.