Open Source Software for Model Driven Development: A Case Study

  • Jonas Gamalielsson
  • Björn Lundell
  • Anders Mattsson
Part of the IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology book series (IFIPAICT, volume 365)

Abstract

Model Driven Development (MDD) is widely used in the embedded systems domain, and many proprietary and Open Source tools exist that support MDD. The potential for sustainability of such tools needs to assessed prior to any organisational adoption. In this paper we report from a case study conducted in a consultancy company context aiming to investigate Open Source tools for MDD. For the company it was interesting to explore the two Open Source modelling tools Topcased and Papyrus for potential adoption. The focus for our case study is on assessing the health of the ecosystems for the two investigated Open Source projects by means of quantitative analysis of publically available data sources about Open Source projects. The health of ecosystems is an important prerequisite for a long term sustainable OSS (Open Source Software) tool-chain in the MDD area, which can aid strategic decision making for potential adoption within a company context. We have established details on the extent to which developers and users are active in two specific OSS ecosystems, and identified organisational influence for both ecosystems. We find that the investigated tools are promising regarding the health of their ecosystems, and a natural next step for the company would be to proceed with a pilot study in order to analyse the effectiveness of the investigated tools in company contexts.

References

  1. Bonaccorsi, A., Rossi, C.: Comparing motivations of individual programmers and firms to take part in the open source movement: from community to business. Knowledge Technology and Policy 18, 40–64 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Crowston, K., Howison, J.: The social structure of Free and Open Source software development. First Monday 10(2) (2005)Google Scholar
  3. Crowston, K., Howison, J.: Assessing the Health of Open Source Communities. IEEE Computer 39(5), 89–91 (2006)Google Scholar
  4. Daffara, C.: The SME guide to Open Source Software, 4th edn. FLOSSMETRICS report, European Commission project FP6-033982 (July 4, 2009), http://www.flossmetrics.org/sections/deliverables/docs/WP8/D8.1.1-SMEs_Guide.pdf (accessed June 4, 2011)
  5. Duenas, J.C., Parada G.H.A., Cuadrado, F., Santillan, M., Ruiz, J.L. (2007). Apache and Eclipse: Comparing Open Source Project Incubators. IEEE Software, 24 (6): 90-98. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Ebert, C.: Open source software in industry. IEEE Software 25, 52–53 (2008)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Eclipse.org. Eclipse Automotive Interest Group- meeting minutes (2009), http://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/auto-iwg/pdfTcIV3Ghb68.pdf (accessed June 4, 2011)
  8. Eclipse.org. Papyrus (2011a), http://www.eclipse.org/modeling/mdt/papyrus (accessed June 4, 2011)
  9. Eclipse.org. Papyrus (2011b), http://www.eclipse.org/modeling/mdt (accessed June 4, 2011)
  10. Eclipse.org. An Extended Survey of Open Source Model-Based Engineering Tools (2010), http://wiki.eclipse.org/images/d/dc/Report.external.bvs.pdf (accessed June 4, 2011)
  11. Eclipsecon.org. Papyrus: Advent of an Open Source IME at Eclipse (2010), http://www.eclipsecon.org/2010/sessions/sessions?id=1385 (accessed June 4, 2011)
  12. Fitzgerald, B.: The Transformation of Open Source Software. MIS Quarterly 30(3), 587–598 (2006)Google Scholar
  13. Gamalielsson, J., Lundell, B., Lings, B.: The Nagios community: An extended quantitative analysis. In: Ågerfalk, P., Boldyreff, C., González-Barahona, J.M., Madey, G.R., Noll, J., et al. (eds.) OSS 2010. IFIP AICT, vol. 319, pp. 85–96. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gamalielsson, J., Lundell, B.: Open Source Software for Data Curation of Digital Assets: a case study. In: Lugmayr, A., et al. (eds.) Proceedings of Mindtrek 2010 of 14th International Digital Media & Business Conference (MindTrek): Envisioning Future Media Environments, pp. 53–56. ACM, New York (2010)Google Scholar
  15. German, D.: The GNOME project: a case study of open source global software development. Journal of Software Process: Improvement and Practice 8(4), 201–215 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hase, K.R.: ”openETCS”: An Open Source Approach for Railway Safety Systems Adopting TOPCASED for CENELEC EN 50126/50128 Safety Case. In: First Topcased Days Toulouse 2011, Toulouse, France, February 2-4 (2011), http://gforge.enseeiht.fr/docman/view.php/52/4289/A2-DeutscheBahn.pdf (accessed June 4, 2011)
  17. Kamei, Y., Matsumoto, S., Maeshima, H., Onishi, Y., Ohira, M., Matsumoto, K.: Analysis of Coordination Between Developers and Users in the Apache Community. In: Russo, B., et al. (eds.) Open Source Development, Communities and Quality, pp. 81–92. Springer, Boston (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Krishnamurthy, S.: Cave or Community? An Empirical Examination of 100 Mature Open Source Projects. First Monday 7(6) (2002)Google Scholar
  19. van der Linden, F., Lundell, B., Marttiin, P.: Commodification of Industrial Software: A Case for Open Source. IEEE Software 26(4), 77–83 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lopez-Fernandez, L., Robles, G., Gonzalez-Barahona, J.M., Herraiz, I.: Applying Social Network Analysis Techniques to Community-driven Libre Software Projects. International Journal of Information Technology and Web Engineering 1, 27–48 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lundell, B., Bermejo, J., Labezin, C., Sempert, F., Valentin, M.-L., Laprevote, A., van der Linden, F., Pablos, J.J.: Open Source Software Workshop, ITEA 2 Symposium, Rotterdam, October 21 (2008)Google Scholar
  22. Lundell, B., Lings, B.: On understanding evaluation of tool support for IS development. Australasian Journal of Information Systems (AJIS) 12(1), 39–53 (2004)Google Scholar
  23. Lundell, B., Lings, B., Lindqvist, E.: Open Source in Swedish companies: where are we? Information Systems Journal 20(6), 519–535 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lundell, B., Lings, B., Syberfeldt, A.: Practitioner perceptions of Open Source software in the embedded systems area. Journal of Systems and Software (in press, 2011)Google Scholar
  25. Martinez-Romo, J., Robles, G., Ortuño-Perez, M., Gonzalez-Barahona, J.M.: Using Social Network Analysis Techniques to Study Collaboration between a FLOSS Community and a Company. In: Russo, B., et al. (eds.) Open Source Development, Communities and Quality, pp. 171–186. Springer, Boston (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Mattsson, A., Lundell, B., Lings, B., Fitzgerald, B.: Linking Model-Driven Development and Software Architecture: A Case Study. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 35(1), 83–93 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Mockus, A., Fielding, R.T., Herbsleb, J.D.: Two case studies of open source software development: Apache and Mozilla. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology 11(3), 309–346 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Moon, Y.J., Sproull, L.: Essence of distributed work: The case of the Linux kernel. First Monday 5(11) (2000)Google Scholar
  29. Ohloh.net. Topcased (2011a), http://www.ohloh.net/p/topcased (accessed June 4, 2011)
  30. Ohloh.net. MDT Papyrus (2011b), http://www.ohloh.net/p/mdt-papyrus (accessed June 4, 2011)
  31. Petrinja, E., Sillitti, A., Succi, G.: Comparing OpenBRR, QSOS and OMM Assessment Models. In: Ågerfalk, P., Boldyreff, C., González-Barahona, J.M., Madey, G.R., Noll, J., et al. (eds.) OSS 2010. IFIP AICT, vol. 319, pp. 224–238. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Pouly, J., Rolland, J.F., Faure, T., Hyounet, P., Zanon, O.: Automatic generation of tests from UML models to validate satellite flight software. In: First Topcased Days Toulouse 2011, Toulouse, France, February 2-4 (2011), http://gforge.enseeiht.fr/docman/view.php/52/ (accessed June 4, 2011)
  33. Robert, S.: New trends and needs for Avionics Systems. In: ARTEMIS Conference, Berlin (May 2007), https://www.artemisia-association.org/downloads/SYLVIE_ROBERT_AC_2007.pdf (accessed June 4, 2011)
  34. Topcased.org. Topcased – The Open Source Toolkit for Critical Systems (2011a), http://www.topcased.org (accessed June 4, 2011)
  35. Topcased.org. First Topcased Days Toulouse 2011, Toulouse, France, February 2-4 (2011b), http://www.topcased.org/index.php/content/view/53 (accessed June 4, 2011)
  36. West, J.: How Open is Open Enough? Melding Proprietary and Open Source Platform Strategies. Research Policy 32(7), 1259–1285 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jonas Gamalielsson
    • 1
  • Björn Lundell
    • 1
  • Anders Mattsson
    • 2
  1. 1.University of SkövdeSkövdeSweden
  2. 2.Combitech ABJönköpingSweden

Personalised recommendations