Advertisement

Lessons Learned from Co-Evolution of Software Process and Model-Driven Engineering

  • Regina HebigEmail author
  • Andreas I. Schmied
  • Ingo Weisemöller
Chapter

Abstract

Software companies need to cope with permanent changes in market. To stay competitive it is often inevitable to improve processes and adopt to new technologies. Indeed, it is well known that software processes and model-driven engineering (MDE) are subject to evolution. Simultaneously, it is known that MDE can affect process tailoring, which makes it possible that evolution in MDE triggers process evolution and vice versa. This can lead to undesired process changes and additional cost, when process adaptations constitute a need for further investments in MDE tooling. However, there is little knowledge so far whether this co-evolution exists and how it looks like. In this chapter, we present two industrial case studies on co-evolution of MDE and software process. Based on these case studies, we present an initial list of co-evolution drivers and observations made on co-evolution of software processes and MDE. Furthermore, we compile our lessons learned to directly help process managers dealing with co-evolution.

Keywords

Process Change Software Process Evolution Step Modeling Expert Team Size 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Frank Altheide for providing additional information about the history of AUTOSAR.

References

  1. 1.
    Aranda, J., Borici, A., Damian, D.: Transitioning to model-driven development: What is revolutionary, what remains the same. In: Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 7590, pp. 692–708. Springer, Berlin (2012)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Asadi, M., Ramsin, R.: Mda-based methodologies: an analytical survey. In: Proccedings of the European Conference on Model Driven Architecture: Foundations and Applications, pp. 419–431. Springer, Berlin (2008)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Burden, H.k., Heldal, R., Whittle, J.: Comparing and contrasting model-driven engineering at three large companies. In: Proceedings of the International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement, pp. 14:1–14:10. ACM, New York, USA (2014)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Diaz, M., Sligo, J.: How software process improvement helped motorola. IEEE Softw. 14(5), 75–81 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    France, R., Rumpe, B.: Model-driven development of complex software: a research roadmap. In: Future of Software Engineering, pp. 37–54. IEEE, Washington, DC, USA (2007)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gorschek, T., Tempero, E., Angelis, L.: On the use of software design models in software development practice: an empirical investigation. J. Syst. Softw. 95, 176–193 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hebig, R., Bendraou, R.: On the need to study the impact of model driven engineering on software processes. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Software and System Process, pp. 164–168. ACM, New York, USA (2014)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hebig, R., Giese, H.: On the complex nature of mde evolution and its impact on changeability. Softw. Syst. Model. pp. 1–24 (2015)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Heijstek, W., Chaudron, M.R.V.: The impact of model driven development on the software architecture process. In: Proceedings of the EUROMICRO Conference on Software Engineering and Advanced Applications, pp. 333–341. IEEE, Washington, DC, USA (2010)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Herrmannsdörfer, M., Benz, S., Jürgens, E.: Automatability of coupled evolution of metamodels and models in practice. In: Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 5301, pp. 645–659. Springer, Berlin (2008)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hutchinson, J., Whittle, J., Rouncefield, M., Kristoffersen, S.: Empirical assessment of mde in industry. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Software Engineering, pp. 471–480. ACM, New York, USA (2011)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kalus, G., Kuhrmann, M.: Criteria for software process tailoring: a systematic review. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Software and System Process, pp. 171–180. ACM, New York, USA (2013)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kent, S.: Model driven engineering. In: Integrated Formal Methods. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 2335, pp. 286–298. Springer, Berlin (2002)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kleppe, A.G., Warmer, J., Bast, W.: MDA Explained: The Model Driven Architecture: Practice and Promise. Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co. Inc., Boston (2003)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kuhrmann, M., Fernández, D.M., Ternité, T.: Realizing software process lines: Insights and experiences. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Software and System Process, pp. 99–108. ACM, New York, USA (2014)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kulkarni, V., Barat, S., Ramteerthkar, U.: Early experience with agile methodology in a model-driven approach. In: Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 6981, pp. 578–590. Springer, Berlin (2011)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Liebel, G., Marko, N., Tichy, M., Leitner, A., Hansson, J.: Assessing the state-of-practice of model-based engineering in the embedded systems domain. In: Model-Driven Engineering Languages and Systems. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 8767, pp. 166–182. Springer, Berlin (2014)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Loniewski, G., Armesto, A., Insfran, E.: An agile method for model-driven requirements engineering. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Software Engineering Advances, pp. 570–575. IARIA Inc. (2011)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Martínez-Ruiz, T., Münch, J., García, F., Piattini, M.: Requirements and constructors for tailoring software processes: a systematic literature review. Softw. Qual. J. 20(1), 229–260 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Mens, T., Blanc, X., Mens, K.: Model-driven software evolution: An alternative research agenda. In: BElgian-NEtherlands software eVOLution workshop (BENEVOL) (2007)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Meyers, B., Vangheluwe, H.: A framework for evolution of modelling languages. Sci. Comput. Program. 76(12), 1223–1246 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ocampo, A., Münch, J.: Rationale modeling for software process evolution. Softw. Process: Improv. Pract. 14(2), 85–105 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    OMG: Unified Modeling Language (UML) ver 2.5. OMG Standard Document Number: ptc/2013-09-05, Object Management Group (2013)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Rombach, D.: Integrated software process and product lines. In: Unifying the Software Process Spectrum. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 3840, pp. 83–90. Springer, Berlin (2006)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Soley, R.: Model driven architecture. OMG White Paper 308, Object Management Group (2000)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Stahl, T., Voelter, M., Czarnecki, K.: Model-Driven Software Development: Technology, Engineering, Management. Wiley, New Jersey (2006)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Staron, M.: Adopting model driven software development in industry – a case study at two companies. In: Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 4199, pp. 57–72. Springer, Berlin (2006)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Torchiano, M., Tomassetti, F., Ricca, F., Tiso, A., Reggio, G.: Relevance, benefits, and problems of software modelling and model driven techniques-a survey in the italian industry. J. Syst. Softw. 86(8), 2110–2126 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    van Deursen, A., Visser, E., Warmer, J., Tamzalit, D.: Model-driven software evolution: a research agenda. In: Proceedings of the CSMR Workshop on Model-Driven Software Evolution, pp. 41–49 (2007)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Whittle, J., Hutchinson, J., Rouncefield, M., Burden, H., Heldal, R.: Industrial adoption of model-driven engineering: are the tools really the problem? In: Model-Driven Engineering Languages and Systems. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 8107, pp. 1–17. Springer, Berlin (2013)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Whittle, J., Hutchinson, J., Rouncefield, M.: The state of practice in model-driven engineering. IEEE Softw. 31(3), 79–85 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Regina Hebig
    • 1
    Email author
  • Andreas I. Schmied
    • 2
  • Ingo Weisemöller
    • 3
  1. 1.Software Engineering DivisionChalmers University of Technology & University of GothenburgGothenburgSweden
  2. 2.Capgemini Deutschland GmbHStuttgartGermany
  3. 3.Carmeq GmbHBerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations