Workflows and Cooperative Processes

  • Jacky Estublier
  • Sergio Garcia
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3966)


Workflows emphasize the partial order of activities, and the flow of data between activities. In contrast, cooperative processes emphasize the sharing of artefact, and its gradual evolution toward the final product, under the cooperative and concurrent activities of all the involved actors.

This paper contrasts workflow and cooperative processes and shows that they are more complementary than conflicting and that, provided some extensions, both approaches can fit into a single tool and formalism.

The paper presents Celine, a concurrent engineering tool that allows also to define and support classic workflows and software processes. We claim that the availability of both classes of features allows for the modelling and support of very flexible processes, closer to software engineering reality.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Derniame, J.-C., Kaba, B., Wastell, D.: Software Process: Principles, Methodology and Technology. In: Derniame, J.-C., Kaba, B.A., Wastell, D. (eds.) Promoter-2 1998. LNCS, vol. 1500, Springer, Heidelberg (1999)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Georgakopoulos, D., Hornick, M.F., Sheth, A.P.: An overview of workflow management-from process modeling to workflow automation infrastructure. Distributed and Parallel Databases 3(2), 119–153 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Estublier, J., Dami, S., Amiour, M.: APEL: A graphical yet Executable Formalism for Process Modelling. Automated Software Engineering, ASE journal 5(1) (1998)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Estublier, J., Favre, J.M., Morat, P.: Toward an integration SCM / PDM. In: Magnusson, B. (ed.) ECOOP 1998 and SCM 1998. LNCS, vol. 1439, Springer, Heidelberg (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Estublier, J., Garcia, S.: Process Model and Awareness in SCM. In: 12th Software Configuration Management Workshop. Lisboa, Portugal (September 2005)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Russel, N., ter Hofstede, A.H.M., Edmond, D.: Workflow Data Patterns,
  7. 7.
    Estublier, J., Garcia, S., Vega, G.: "Defining and Supporting Concurrent Engineering policies in SCM" SCM-11 May, Portland, Oregon, USA (2003)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Barghouti, N.S.: Supporting Cooperation in the Marvel Process-Centered SDE. In: Weber, H. (ed.) 5th ACM SIGSOFT Symposium on Software Development Environments. Special issue of Software Engineering Notes, vol. 17, pp. 21–31. Tyson’s Corner VA (1992)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Charoy, F., Godart, C., Grigori, D.: COO-flow: a Process Technology to Support Cooperative Processes. International Journal of Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering 14(1) (January 2004) (Special issue: Best Papers from SEKE 2003)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sarma, A., Noroozi, Z., Van Der hoek, A.: Palantir: Raising Awareness among Configuration Management Workspaces. In: 25th International Conference on Software Engineering, Portland, Oregon, May 3-5 (2003)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Perry, D.E., Siy, H.P., Votta, L.G.: Parallel Changes in Large Scale Software Development: An observational Case Study. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology (TOSEM) 10(3) (July 2001)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Godart, C.: Tutorial: Les outils du travail coopératif. Un point de vue ingénierie des données. In: 18ème Journées Bases de Données Avancées - BDA 2002, Evry, France (October 2002)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jacky Estublier
    • 1
  • Sergio Garcia
    • 1
  1. 1.LSR-IMAGGrenobleFrance

Personalised recommendations