Traceability for Model Driven, Software Product Line Engineering

Traceability is an important challenge for software organizations. This is true for traditional software development and even more so in new approaches that introduce more variety of artefacts such as Model Driven development or Software Product Lines. In this paper we look at some aspect of the interaction of Traceability, Model Driven development and Software Product Line

Variability and Evolution in Systems of Systems

In this position paper (1) we discuss two particular aspects of Systems of Systems, i.e., variability and evolution. (2) We argue that concepts from Product Line Engineering and Software Evolution are relevant to Systems of Systems Engineering. (3) Conversely, concepts from Systems of Systems Engineering can be helpful in Product Line Engineering and Software Evolution. Hence, we argue that an exchange of concepts between the disciplines would be beneficial.Comment: In Proceedings AiSoS 2013, arXiv:1311.319

On the structure of problem variability: From feature diagrams to problem frames

Requirements for product families are expressed in terms of commonality and variability. This distinction allows early identification of an appropriate software architecture and opportunities for software reuse. Feature diagrams provide intuitive notations and techniques for representing requirements in product line development. In this paper, we observe that feature diagrams tend to obfuscate three important descriptions: requirements, domain properties and specifications. As a result, feature diagrams do not adequately capture the problem structures that underlie variability, and inform the solution structures of their complexity. With its emphasis on separation of the three descriptions, the problem frames approach provides a conceptual framework for a more detailed analysis of variability and its structure. With illustrations from an example, we demonstrate how problem frames analysis of variability can augment feature diagrams

Using problem descriptions to represent variabilities for context-aware applications

This paper investigates the potential use of problem descriptions to represent and analyse variability in context-aware software products. By context-aware, we refer to recognition of changes in properties of external domains, which are recognised as affecting the behaviour of products. There are many reasons for changes in the operating environment, from fluctuating resources upon which the product relies, to different operating locations or the presence of objects. There is an increasing expectation for software intensivedevices to be context-aware which, in turn, adds further variability to problem description and analysis. However, we argue in this paper that the capture of contextual variability on current variability representations and analyses has yet to be explored. We illustrate the representation of this type of variability in a pilot study, and conclude with lessons learnt and an agenda for further work

Conflict Detection for Edits on Extended Feature Models using Symbolic Graph Transformation

Feature models are used to specify variability of user-configurable systems as appearing, e.g., in software product lines. Software product lines are supposed to be long-living and, therefore, have to continuously evolve over time to meet ever-changing requirements. Evolution imposes changes to feature models in terms of edit operations. Ensuring consistency of concurrent edits requires appropriate conflict detection techniques. However, recent approaches fail to handle crucial subtleties of extended feature models, namely constraints mixing feature-tree patterns with first-order logic formulas over non-Boolean feature attributes with potentially infinite value domains. In this paper, we propose a novel conflict detection approach based on symbolic graph transformation to facilitate concurrent edits on extended feature models. We describe extended feature models formally with symbolic graphs and edit operations with symbolic graph transformation rules combining graph patterns with first-order logic formulas. The approach is implemented by combining eMoflon with an SMT solver, and evaluated with respect to applicability.Comment: In Proceedings FMSPLE 2016, arXiv:1603.0857

Automated analysis of feature models: Quo vadis?

Feature models have been used since the 90's to describe software product lines as a way of reusing common parts in a family of software systems. In 2010, a systematic literature review was published summarizing the advances and settling the basis of the area of Automated Analysis of Feature Models (AAFM). From then on, different studies have applied the AAFM in different domains. In this paper, we provide an overview of the evolution of this field since 2010 by performing a systematic mapping study considering 423 primary sources. We found six different variability facets where the AAFM is being applied that define the tendencies: product configuration and derivation; testing and evolution; reverse engineering; multi-model variability-analysis; variability modelling and variability-intensive systems. We also confirmed that there is a lack of industrial evidence in most of the cases. Finally, we present where and when the papers have been published and who are the authors and institutions that are contributing to the field. We observed that the maturity is proven by the increment in the number of journals published along the years as well as the diversity of conferences and workshops where papers are published. We also suggest some synergies with other areas such as cloud or mobile computing among others that can motivate further research in the future.Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad TIN2015-70560-RJunta de Andalucía TIC-186

Detecting and Explaining Conflicts in Attributed Feature Models

Product configuration systems are often based on a variability model. The development of a variability model is a time consuming and error-prone process. Considering the ongoing development of products, the variability model has to be adapted frequently. These changes often lead to mistakes, such that some products cannot be derived from the model anymore, that undesired products are derivable or that there are contradictions in the variability model. In this paper, we propose an approach to discover and to explain contradictions in attributed feature models efficiently in order to assist the developer with the correction of mistakes. We use extended feature models with attributes and arithmetic constraints, translate them into a constraint satisfaction problem and explore those for contradictions. When a contradiction is found, the constraints are searched for a set of contradicting relations by the QuickXplain algorithm.Comment: In Proceedings FMSPLE 2015, arXiv:1504.0301