Towards a Computer-Aided Problem-Oriented Variability Requirements Engineering Method

  • Azadeh Alebrahim
  • Stephan Faßbender
  • Martin Filipczyk
  • Michael Goedicke
  • Maritta Heisel
  • Marco Konersmann
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 178)

Abstract

In theory, software product lines are planned in advance, using established engineering methods. However, there are cases where commonalities and variabilities between several systems are only discovered after they have been developed individually as single systems. In retrospect, this leads to the hindsight that these systems should have been developed as a software product line from the beginning to reduce costs and effort. To cope with the challenge of detecting variability early on, we propose the PREVISE method, covering domain and application engineering. Domain engineering is concerned with exploring the variability caused by entities in the environment of the software and the variability in functional and quality requirements. In application engineering, the configuration for a concrete product is selected, and subsequently, a requirement model for a concrete product is derived.

Keywords

Variability modeling problem frames software product lines (SPL) orthogonal variability modeling (OVM) UML profile 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Alebrahim, A., Choppy, C., Faßbender, S., Heisel, M.: Optimizing functional and quality requirements according to stakeholders’ goals. In: Mistrik, I. (ed.) Relating System Quality and Software Architecture. Springer ( to appear, 2014)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Alebrahim, A., Faßbender, S., Heisel, M., Meis, R.: Problem-Based Requirements Interaction Analysis. In: Salinesi, C., van de Weerd, I. (eds.) REFSQ 2014. LNCS, vol. 8396, pp. 200–215. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Alebrahim, A., Hatebur, D., Heisel, M.: A method to derive software architectures from quality requirements. In: APSEC, pp. 322–330. IEEE Computer Society (2011)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Alebrahim, A., Hatebur, D., Heisel, M.: Towards systematic integration of quality requirements into software architecture. In: Crnkovic, I., Gruhn, V., Book, M. (eds.) ECSA 2011. LNCS, vol. 6903, pp. 17–25. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ali, R., Yu, Y., Chitchyan, R., Nhlabatsi, A., Giorgini, P.: Towards a Unified Framework for Contextual Variability in Requirements. In: IWSPM 2009, pp. 31–34. IEEE (2009)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Beckers, K., Faßbender, S., Heisel, M., Meis, R.: A problem-based approach for computer-aided privacy threat identification. In: Preneel, B., Ikonomou, D. (eds.) APF 2012. LNCS, vol. 8319, pp. 1–16. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Classen, A., Heymans, P., Laney, R.C., Nuseibeh, B., Tun, T.T.: On the Structure of Problem Variability: From Feature Diagrams to Problem Frames. In: VaMoS 2007, pp. 109–117 (2007)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dao, T.M., Lee, H., Kang, K.C.: Problem frames-based approach to achieving quality attributes in software product line engineering. In: SPLC 2011, pp. 175–180. IEEE (2011)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hatebur, D., Heisel, M.: A UML profile for requirements analysis of dependable software. In: Schoitsch, E. (ed.) SAFECOMP 2010. LNCS, vol. 6351, pp. 317–331. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Jackson, M.: Problem Frames. Analyzing and structuring software development problems. Addison-Wesley (2001)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Konersmann, M., Alebrahim, A., Heisel, M., Goedicke, M., Kersten, B.: Deriving Quality-based Architecture Alternatives with Patterns. In: SE. LNI, vol. 198, pp. 71–82. GI (2012)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Pohl, K., Böckle, G., van der Linden, F.: Software Product Line Engineering - Foundations, Principles, and Techniques, pp. 1–467. Springer (2005)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Salifu, M., Nuseibeh, B., Rapanotti, L., Tun, T.T.: Using Problem Descriptions to Represent Variabilities For Context-Aware Applications. In: VaMoS 2007, pp. 149–156 (2007)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Zuo, H., Mannion, M., Sellier, D., Foley, R.: An Extension of Problem Frame Notation for Software Product Lines. In: APSEC 2005, pp. 499–505. IEEE (2005)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Azadeh Alebrahim
    • 1
  • Stephan Faßbender
    • 1
  • Martin Filipczyk
    • 1
  • Michael Goedicke
    • 1
  • Maritta Heisel
    • 1
  • Marco Konersmann
    • 1
  1. 1.Paluno – The Ruhr Institute for Software TechnologyGermany

Personalised recommendations