Versioning system models through description logic

  • Andreas Zeller
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1439)


In software configuration management, little attention has been paid to the evolution of system models, that is, the description of the components that make up a system, and the relationships between them. We present an extension to the version set model based on description logic, where roles, set-valued features, model relationships between version sets. Relationships are versioned with their components; features are propagated and unified along component relationships, ensuring configuration completeness and consistency. The integrated version set model has been realized in ICE MAKE, a MAKE clone dealing with versioned system models. ICE MAKE constructs arbitrary version sets according to their respective dependencies and deduces features and dependencies as imposed by the propagated configuration constraints.

Key words

Software configuration management Version control Software architecture Deduction and theorem proving Knowledge representation formalisms and methods 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Adams, P., and Solomon, M. An overview of the CAPITL software development environment. In Estublier [3]., pp. 1–34.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Brandes, M. Deduktive Programmkonstruktion auf Basis von MAKE. Master's thesis, Technical University of Braunschweig, Germany, Dec. 1996. In German.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Estublier, J., Ed. Software Configuration Management: selected papers / ICSE SCM-4 and SCM-5 workshops (Seattle, Washington, Oct. 1995), vol. 1005 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Estublier, J., and Casallas, R. The Adele configuration manager. In Tichy [8], ch. 4, pp. 99–133.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gulla, B., Karlsson, E.-A., and Yeh, D. Change-oriented version descriptions in EPOS. Software Engineering Journal 6, 6 (Nov. 1991), 378–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Mahler, A. Variants: Keeping things together and telling them apart. In Tichy [8], ch. 3, pp. 39–69.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Smolka, G. Feature-constrained logics for unification grammars. Journal of Logic Programming 12 (1992), 51–87.MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Tichy, W. F., Ed. Configuration Management, vol. 2 of Trends in Software. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, UK, 1994.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Tryggeseth, E., Gulla, B., and Conradi, R. Modelling systems with variability using the PROTEUS configuration language. In Estublier [3]., pp. 216–240.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Zeller, A. Smooth operations with square operators—The version set model in ICE. In Proc. 6th International Workshop on Software Configuration Management (Berlin, Germany, Mar. 1996), I. Sommerville, Ed., vol. 1167 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Springer-Verlag, pp. 8–30.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Zeller, A.Configuration Management with Version Sets. PhD thesis, Technical University of Braunschweig, Germany, Apr. 1997.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Zeller, A. Versioning software systems through concept descriptions. Computer Science Report 97-01, Technical University of Braunschweig, Germany, Jan. 1997.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Zeller, A., and Snelting, G. Unified versioning through feature logic. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology 6, 4 (Oct. 1997), 398–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andreas Zeller
    • 1
  1. 1.Abteilung SoftwaretechnologieTechnische Universität BraunschweigBraunschweigGermany

Personalised recommendations