Framework for evaluating the version management capabilities of a class of UML modeling tools from the viewpoint of multi-site, multi-partner product line organizations

Proceedings of the Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences

Volumn , Issue , 2010, Pages

  Koivulahti Ojala, Mervi ^a   Käkölä, Timo ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF JYVÄSKYLÄ   (Finland)

Author keywords

Global software development; Modeling tool; Software product line organization; Tool evaluation; UML modeling; Version management

Indexed keywords

GLOBAL SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT; MODELING TOOL; ORGANIZATION TOOLS; SOFTWARE PRODUCT LINE; UML MODELING; VERSION MANAGEMENT;

COMPUTER SOFTWARE SELECTION AND EVALUATION; MANAGEMENT; MODELS; PRODUCTION ENGINEERING; UNIFIED MODELING LANGUAGE;

SOFTWARE DESIGN;

EID: 77951725271     PISSN: 15301605     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1109/HICSS.2010.213     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (35)

1. Appleton, B., Berczuk, S., Cabrera, R. and Orenstei, R. (1998). Streamed Lines: Branching Patterns for Parallel Software Development. In PLoP '98 conference. Available at: http://www.cmcrossroads.com/bradapp/acme/branching/
2. Arciniegas, J.L., Dueñas, J.C., Ruiz, J.L., Ceron, R., Bermejo, J. (2006). Architecture Reasoning for Supporting Product Line Evolution: An Example on Security. In T. Käkölä & J.C. Dueñas (Eds.), Software Product Lines: Research Issues in Engineering and Management. Springer, 327-372.
3. Arisholm, E., Briand, L.C., Hove, S.E. and Labiche, Y. (2006). The Impact of UML Documentation on Software Maintenance: an Experimental Evaluation, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 32(6), 365-381. (Pubitemid 44194205)
4. Bayer, J., Gerard, S., Haugen, Ø., Mansell, J. X, Møller-Pedersen, B., Oldevik, J., Tessier P., Thibault, J-P and Widen, T. (2006). Consolidated Product Line Variability Modeling. In T. Käkölä & J.C. Dueñas (Eds.), Software Product Lines: Research Issues in Engineering and Management. Springer, 195-241.
5. Bertolino, A.., Fantechi, A., Gnesi, S. and Lami, G. (2006). Product Line Use Cases: Scenario-Based Specification and Testing of Requirements. In T. Käkölä & J.C. Dueñas (Eds.), Software Product Lines: Research Issues in Engineering and Management. Springer, 425-444.
6. Brown, S. L. and Eisenhardt, K.M. (1995). Product Development: Past Research, Present Findings, and Future Directions. Academy of Management Review 20(2), 343-378.
7. Carmel, E. and Agarwal, R. (2001). Tactical Approaches for Alleviating Distance in Global Software Development. IEEE Software, 18(2), 22-29. (Pubitemid 32293336)
8. Carmel, E. and Agarwal, R. (2002). The Maturation of Offshore Sourcing of Information Technology Work. MIS Quarterly Executive, 1(2), 65-78.
9. Cusumano, M. A., and Selby, R. W. (1998). Microsoft® Secrets. Free Press, New York, NY.
10. Dzidek, W.J., Arisholm, E. and Briand, L.C. (2008). A Realistic Empirical Evaluation of the Costs and Benefits of UML in Software Maintenance. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 34(3), 407-432.
11. Funes, A., Dasso, A.., Salgado, C. and Peralta M. (2005). UML Tool Evaluation Requirements. Simposio Argentino de Sistemas de Información. http://www.frcu.utn.edu.ar/deptos/depto-3/34JAIIO/34JAIIO/asis/ASIS20.pdf.
12. Gomaa, H. (2004). Designing Software Product Lines with UML: From Use Cases to Pattern-Based Software Architectures. In R. L. Nord (Ed.): Software Product Lines, Third International Conference, SPLC 2004. Springer LNCS 3154.
13. Herbsleb, J.D. and Moitra, D. (2001). Guest Editors' Introduction: Global Software Development. IEEE Software, 18(2), 16-20.
14. Hevner, A.R., March, S.T., Park, J. and S. Ram (2004), Design Science in Information Systems Research, MIS Quarterly, 28(1), 75-105.
15. Kang, KC., Kim M., Lee J. and Kim B. (2005). Feature-oriented Re-engineering of Legacy Systems into Product Line Assets. In H. Obbink and K. Pohl (Eds.): Software Product Lines, Ninth International Conference, SPLC 2005. Springer LNCS 3714, 45-56.
16. Kleppe, A.G., Warmer, J., and Bast, W. (2003). MDA Explained: The Model Driven Architecture: Practice and Promise. Addison-Wesley, Boston, MA.
17. Kruchten, P. (1995). The 4+1 View Model of Architecture. IEEE Software, 12(6), 42-50.
18. Käkölä, T. (2008). Best Practices for International eSourcing of Software Products and Services. In Proceedings of the 41st Hawaii International Conference on Systems Sciences (HICSS-41). IEEE.
19. Käkölä, T. and Dueñas, J. (Eds.) (2006). Software Product Lines: Research Issues in Engineering and Management. Springer.
20. Käkölä, T., Koivulahti-Ojala, M., and Liimatainen, J. (2009). An Information Systems Design Product Theory for the Class of Integrated Requirements and Release Management Systems. Software Process: Improvement and Practice (in press).
21. Käkölä, T. and Taalas, A. (2008). Validating the Information Systems Design Theory for Dual Information Systems. In Proceedings of the 29th International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS), Paris. Association for Information Systems, http://www.aisnet.org.
22. Leppänen, S. (2008). Rigorous Service-Oriented Development of Communicating Distributed Systems, PhD Thesis, Tampere University of Technology, Publication 718, Tampere, Finland.
23. Lester, N. G. and Wilkie, F.G. (2005). Evaluating UML Tool Support for Effective Coordination and Communication across Geographically Disparate Sites. In Proceedings of the 2004 International Workshop on Software Technology and Engineering Practice, 57-64.
24. Van der Linden, F., Schmid, K. and Rommes, E. (2007). Software Product Lines in Action: The Best Industrial Practice in Product Line Engineering. Springer.
25. Meyer, M.H. and Selinger, R. (1998). Product Platforms in Software Development. Sloan Management Review, 40(1), 61-74.
26. Norton, D. (2007). Open-Source Modeling Tools Maturing, but Need Time to Reach Full Potential. Gartner Research Report G00146580.
27. Object Management Group (2009). Unified Modeling Language: Superstructure. Formal Specification, version 2.2, 2009.
28. Oldevik, J., Solberg, A., Haugen, Ø. and Møller- Pedersen, B. (2006). Evaluation Framework for Model-Driven Product Line Engineering Tools. In T. Käkölä & J.C. Dueñas (Eds.), Software Product Lines: Research Issues in Engineering and Management. Springer, 589-618.
29. O'Sullivan, B. (2009). Making Sense of Revision- Control Systems. ACM Queue, 7(7). ACM, New York.
30. Pohl, K., Böckle, G. and Van der Linden, F. (2005). Software Product Line Engineering. Springer.
31. Ramasubbu, N., Krishnan, M. S. and Kompalli, P. (2005). Leveraging Global Resources: A Process Maturity Framework for Managing Distributed Development. IEEE Software, 22(3), 80-86. (Pubitemid 40889812)
32. Reuys, A., Reis, S., Kamsties, E., and Pohl, K. (2006). The ScenTED Method for Testing Software Product Lines. In T. Käkölä & J.C. Dueñas (Eds.), Software Product Lines: Research Issues in Engineering and Management. Springer, 479-520.
33. Ronnie, C. (1993). Formal Semantics: An Introduction. Cambridge University Press.
34. Rosenmuller, M., Siegmund, N., Saake, G., and Apel, S. (2008). Code Generation to Support Static and Dynamic Composition of Software Product Lines. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Generative Programming and Component Engineering, 3-12.
35. Ziadi, T. and Jézéquel, J.-M. (2006). Software Product Line Engineering with the UML: Deriving Products. In T. Käkölä & J.C. Dueñas (Eds.), Software Product Lines: Research Issues in Engineering and Management. Springer, 556-588.