An Architecture for Modeling and Applying Quality Processes on Evolving Software

  • Fadrian Sudaman
  • Christine Mingins
  • Martin Dick
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5543)


Software process and product views should be closely linked in order to better manage quality improvement. However until now the two views have not been effectively synchronized. Current approaches to Software Configuration Management (SCM) are strongly based on files and lacking in logical and semantic understanding. Some impediments faced when modeling and analyzing software evolution include additional effort for dealing with language dependent source code analysis and continuous mining of the evolving system. By leveraging features offered by modern VMs and other enabling technologies, we have developed a language neutral architecture with extensibility mechanisms to support continuous Software Evolution Management (SEM). Our research aims to contribute to an SEM infrastructure where semantic artifacts can be consistently accessed, tracked and managed for performing software evolution analytics beyond the file-based model. This paper presents compelling factors for our infrastructure, the architecture we have developed, and then sketches a case study to demonstrate its application.


Software Evolution Design Heuristic Source Code Analysis Product View Logical Data Model 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Hoek, A., Carzaniga, A., Heimbigner, D., Wolf, A.L.: A Testbed for Configuration Management Policy Programming. IEEE Trans. on Software Eng. 28(1) (January 2002)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Draheim, D., Pekacki, L.: Process-Centric Analytical Processing of Version Control Data. In: Proc. of the Sixth IWPSE 2003 (2003)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lance, D., Unteh, R.H., Wahl, N.J.: Bytecode-based Java Program Analysis. In: Proc. of the 37th Annual Southeast Regional Conf. (1999)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sudaman, F., Mingins, C.: Evidence-based Management of Outsourced Software Projects. In: Proc. of the 2nd Conf. on SEAFOOD, Zurich (July 2008)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bevan, J., et al.: Facilitating Software Evolution Research with Kenyon. In: Proc. of the 10th European Software Eng. Conf., Lisbon, Portugal, September 5-6 (2005)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Estublier, J., et al.: Impact of Software Engineering Research on the Practice of Software Configuration Management. IEEE TOSEM (2005)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chu-Carroll, M.C., Wright, J., Shields, D.: Supporting aggregation in fine grained SCM. In: Proc. of the 10th ACM SIGSOFT Symposium on Foundation of S/w Eng., USA (2002)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lanza, M.: The Evolution Matrix: Recovering Software Evolution using Software Visualization Techniques. University of Bern, Switzerland (2001)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lehman, M.M.: Laws of Software Evolution Revisited. In: Proc. of the 5th European Workshop on Software Process Technology, pp. 108–124 (1996)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Madhavji, N.H., Tasse, T.: Policy-guided Software Evolution. In: 19th IEEE Int’l Conf. on Software Maintenance (ICSM 2003) (2003)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Minsky, N.H., Rozenshtein, D.: A Software Development Environment for Law-Governed Systems. In: Proc. of the ACM SIGSOFT/SIGPLAN, vol. 24 (February 1989)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Reißing, R.: Towards a Model for Object-Oriented Design Measurement. In: ECOOP Workshop on Quantative Approaches in OO Software Eng. (2001)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Eick, S.G., et al.: Does Code Decay? Assessing the Evidence from Change Management Data. IEEE Trans. on Software Eng. 27(1) (January 2001)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sarkar, S., Sindhgatta, R., Pooloth, K.: A Collaborative Platform for App. Knowledge Mgmt. in Software Maintenance Projects. In: 1st Bangalore Annual Compute Conf. (2008)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Girba, T., Ducasse, S.: Modeling History to Analyze Software Evolution. Int’l Journal on Software Maintenance and Evolution (JSME) (2006)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Nguyen, T.N., Munson, E.V., Boyland, J.T.: An Infrastructure for Development of OO, Multilevel Configuration Management Services. In: Proc. of the 27th ICSE (2005)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Xing, Z., Stroulia, E.: Analyzing the Evolutionary History of the Logical Design of OO Software. IEEE Trans. on Software Eng. 31(10) (October 2005)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Fadrian Sudaman
    • 1
  • Christine Mingins
    • 1
  • Martin Dick
    • 2
  1. 1.Faculty of ITMonash UniversityAustralia
  2. 2.School of Business ITRMIT UniversityAustralia

Personalised recommendations