3 research outputs found

    Continuous Rationale Management

    Get PDF
    Continuous Software Engineering (CSE) is a software life cycle model open to frequent changes in requirements or technology. During CSE, software developers continuously make decisions on the requirements and design of the software or the development process. They establish essential decision knowledge, which they need to document and share so that it supports the evolution and changes of the software. The management of decision knowledge is called rationale management. Rationale management provides an opportunity to support the change process during CSE. However, rationale management is not well integrated into CSE. The overall goal of this dissertation is to provide workflows and tool support for continuous rationale management. The dissertation contributes an interview study with practitioners from the industry, which investigates rationale management problems, current practices, and features to support continuous rationale management beneficial for practitioners. Problems of rationale management in practice are threefold: First, documenting decision knowledge is intrusive in the development process and an additional effort. Second, the high amount of distributed decision knowledge documentation is difficult to access and use. Third, the documented knowledge can be of low quality, e.g., outdated, which impedes its use. The dissertation contributes a systematic mapping study on recommendation and classification approaches to treat the rationale management problems. The major contribution of this dissertation is a validated approach for continuous rationale management consisting of the ConRat life cycle model extension and the comprehensive ConDec tool support. To reduce intrusiveness and additional effort, ConRat integrates rationale management activities into existing workflows, such as requirements elicitation, development, and meetings. ConDec integrates into standard development tools instead of providing a separate tool. ConDec enables lightweight capturing and use of decision knowledge from various artifacts and reduces the developers' effort through automatic text classification, recommendation, and nudging mechanisms for rationale management. To enable access and use of distributed decision knowledge documentation, ConRat defines a knowledge model of decision knowledge and other artifacts. ConDec instantiates the model as a knowledge graph and offers interactive knowledge views with useful tailoring, e.g., transitive linking. To operationalize high quality, ConRat introduces the rationale backlog, the definition of done for knowledge documentation, and metrics for intra-rationale completeness and decision coverage of requirements and code. ConDec implements these agile concepts for rationale management and a knowledge dashboard. ConDec also supports consistent changes through change impact analysis. The dissertation shows the feasibility, effectiveness, and user acceptance of ConRat and ConDec in six case study projects in an industrial setting. Besides, it comprehensively analyses the rationale documentation created in the projects. The validation indicates that ConRat and ConDec benefit CSE projects. Based on the dissertation, continuous rationale management should become a standard part of CSE, like automated testing or continuous integration

    Requirements engineering: foundation for software quality

    Get PDF

    Missing Requirements Information and its Impact on Software Architectures: A Case Study

    Get PDF
    [Context & motivation] In the development of large, software-intensive systems, the system’s requirements are seldom, if ever, concluded upon prior to commencing with systems architecture. Research shows that, in order to manage development and domain complexities, instances of requirements engineering (RE) and systems architecting (SA) processes tend to inter-weave. [Question/problem] However, missing requirements information can cause one to create (or recreate) the needed information during different SA activities. While backtracking in the software development process is known to be costly, the costs associated with missing requirements in the SA process have not been investigated empirically. [Principal ideas/results] We thus conducted a case study where we investigated to what extent requirements or requirements attributes’ information found missing during the SA process and impact of those missing information on SA in terms of effort. The study involved five architecting teams that involve final year undergraduate and graduate students enrolled in the university course on SA, working on architecting a system falls under “banking” domain. Our result shows that, architects did find requirements and requirements attributes’ information missing while architecting. Among requirements information, architects found that, system functionality information, constraints information and system interaction (users/systems) information are missing in requirements at higher percentages. Within requirements’ attributes, architects found requirements priority, dependency and rationale missing at higher percentages. It is also found that, out of total time spent on architecting the system, effort given to recreate missing requirements information is higher for group3 (21.5%), group1 (18%), and group2 (17%) other than group4 (12.37%) and group5(10.18%). [Contribution] The anticipated benefits of the findings are, it can motivate researchers to venture into other areas of software engineering (such as coding, testing, maintenance, etc.) from the view point of missing requirements information and its impact on those areas. This knowledge could help software practitioners to decide what kind of information need to take care of, during RE process, that could possibly ease SA process and later development phases. To the best of my knowledge, this is the first work which focuses on, to what extent requirements and requirements’ attributes information found missing during SA; characteristics and impact of those requirements missing information on SA process in terms of effort
    corecore