Comprehensive architecture evaluation and management in large software-systems

Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics)

Volumn 5281 LNCS, Issue , 2008, Pages 205-219

  Salger, Frank ^a   Bennicke, Marcel ^b   Engels, Gregor ^a,c   Lewerentz, Claus ^b  

^a Software Design & Management AG   (Germany)

^b BRANDENBURG UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Germany)

^c UNIVERSITY OF PADERBORN   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

SOFTWARE ARCHITECTURE; SYSTEMATIC ERRORS;

ARCHITECTURAL DECISION; ARCHITECTURE EVALUATION; COMPREHENSIVE METHOD; CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTOR; DISTRIBUTED DEVELOPMENT; LARGE SOFTWARE SYSTEMS; MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORKS; PROJECT ACTIVITIES;

COMPUTER SOFTWARE;

EID: 70350633962     PISSN: 03029743     EISSN: 16113349     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-540-87879-7_13     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (20)

1. Clements, P., Kazman, R., Klein, M.: Evaluating Software Architectures Methods and Case Studies. Addison-Wesley, Reading (2002)
2. Rational Unified Process. IBM Coporation. Version 7.0.1. 2000 (2007)
3. Fagan, M.: Advances in Software Inspections. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 12(7), 744-751 (1986)
4. ISO/IEC 15504-2:2003(E). Software engineering - Process assessment - Part 2: Performing an assessment
5. IEEE Std. 1028-1997 - Standard for Software Reviews. The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc. New York (1997)
6. Gilb, T., Graham, D.: Software Inspection. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1993)
7. Wiegers, K.E.: Peer Reviews in Software - A Practical Guide. Addison-Wesley, Reading (2002)
8. CMMI® for Development, Version 1.2. CMU/SEI-2006-TR-008, ESC-TR-2006-008. Carnegie Mellon, Software Engineering Institute (2006)
9. ISO/IEC 15504-5:2006(E). Information technology - Process assessment - Part 5: An exemplar process assessment model
10. ISO/IEC 9126-1:2001(E). Software Engineering - Product Quality - Part 1: Quality Model
11. Haft, M., Humm, B., Siedersleben, J.: The Architect's Dilemma - Will Reference Architectures Help? In: Reussner, R., Mayer, J., Stafford, J.A., Overhage, S., Becker, S., Schroeder, P.J. (eds.) QoSA 2005 and SOQUA 2005. LNCS, vol. 3712. pp. 106-122. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)
12. Conway, M.: How Do Committees Invent? Datamation 14(4), 28-31 (1968)
13. Parnas, D.L.: On the Criteria To Be Used in Decomposing Systems into Modules. CACM 15(12), 1053-1058 (1972)
14. Lakos, J.: Large-Scale C++ Software Design. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1996)
15. Murphy, G.C., Notkin, D., Sullivan, K.: Software Reflexion Models. Bridging the Gap Between Source and High-Level Models. In: Proc. of the Third ACM SIGSOFT Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering, pp. 18-28. ACM Press, New York (1995)
16. Koschke, R., Simon, D.: Hierarchical Reflexion Models. In: Proc. of 10th Working Conference on Reverse Engineering (WCRE 2003), pp. 36-45. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2003)
17. Sangal, N., Jordan, E., Sinha, V., Jackson, D.: Using Dependency Models to Manage Complex Software Architecture. In: Proceedings of the 20th annual ACM SIGPLAN conference o n object oriented programming, systems, languages, and applications, OOPSLA 2005, pp. 167-176. ACM Press, New York (2005)
18. SonarJ vendor homepage, http://www.hello2morrow.com
19. SotoArc vendor homepage, http://www.software-tomography.com
20. Becker-Pechau, P., Bennicke, M.: Concepts of Modeling Architectural Module Views for Consistency Checks Based on Architectural Styles. In: Smith, J. (ed.) Proc. of the 11th IASTED International Conference on Software Engineering and Applications (SEA 2007), Acta Press (2007)