Abstract
In this paper, we present a novel technique for assessing and prioritizing architectural quality in large-scale software development projects. The technique can be applied with relatively little effort by software architects and thus suited for agile development in which quality attributes can be assessed and prioritized, e.g., within each development sprint. We outline the processes and metrics embodied in the technique, and report initial experiences on the benefits and liabilities. In conclusion, the technique is considered valuable and a viable tool, and has benefits in an architectural, technical, context, as well as in a business and people context.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Abowd, G., Bass, L., Clements, P., Kazman, R., Northrop, L., Zaremski, A.: Recommended best industrial practice for software architecture evaluation. Software Engineering Institute Technical Report, CMU/SEI-96-TR-025 (1996)
Babar, M.A., Gorton, I.: Comparison of scenario-based software architecture evaluation methods. In: 11th Asia-Pacific Software Engineering Conference 2004, pp. 600–607 (2004)
Babar, M.A., Kitchenham, B., Jeffery, R.: Comparing distributed and face-to-face meetings for software architecture evaluation: A controlled experiment. Empirical Software Engineering 13(1), 39–62 (2008)
Bass, L., Clements, P., Kazman, R.: Software Architecture in Practice, 2nd edn. Addison-Wesley, Reading (2003)
Boucké, N., Weyns, D., Schelfthout, K., Holvoet, T.: Applying the ATAM to an architecture for decentralized control of a transportation system. Quality of Software Architectures, 180–198 (2004)
Christensen, H.B., Hansen, K.M., Lindstrøm, B.: aSQA: Architectural Software Quality Assurance. Technical report, Computer Science Department, Aarhus University (2010)
Christensen, H.B., Hansen, K.M., Schougaard, K.R.: SA@Work - A Field Study of Software Architecture and Software Quality at Work. In: Proceedings of Asia-Pacific Software Engineering Conference, APSEC 2008, Beijing, China, December 2008, pp. 411–418 (2008)
Christensen, H.B., Hansen, K.M., Schougaard, K.R.: An Empirical Study of Software Architects’ Concerns. In: Proceedings of the 16th Asia-Pacific Software Engineering Conference, APSEC, pp. 111–118 (2009)
Clements, P., Kazman, R., Klein, M.: Evaluating software architectures: methods and case studies. Addison-Wesley, Reading (2002)
Clements, P., Kazman, R., Klein, M.: Evaluating software architectures: methods and case studies. Addison-Wesley, Reading (2006)
CMMI Product Team. Cmmi for development. version 1.2. Technical report, CMU/SEI (2006)
Dobrica, L., Niemelä, E.: A survey on software architecture analysis methods. IEEE Transactions on software Engineering, 638–653 (2002)
ISO/IEC. Software engineering – Product quality – Part 1: Quality model., ISO/IEC 9126-1:2001 (2001)
Jakobsen, C.R., Johnson, K.A.: Mature Agile with a Twist of CMMI. In: AGILE Conference, pp. 212–217 (2008)
Kazman, R., Asundi, J., Klein, M.: Quantifying the costs and benefits of architectural decisions. In: ICSE, pp. 297–306. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2001)
Kazman, R., Bass, L., Webb, M., Abowd, G.: SAAM: A method for analyzing the properties of software architectures. In: Proceedings of the 16th international conference on Software engineering, pp. 81–90. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (1994)
Kazman, R., Klein, M.H., Barbacci, M., Longstaff, T.A., Lipson, H.F., Carrière, S.J.: The architecture tradeoff analysis method. In: ICECCS, pp. 68–78. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (1998)
Northrop, L., Feiler, P., Gabriel, R., Goodenough, J., Linger, R., Longstaff, T., Kazman, R., Klein, M., Schmidt, D., Sullivan, K., et al.: Ultra-large-scale systems: The software challenge of the future. Software Engineering Institute (2006)
Poppendieck, M., Poppendieck, T.: Software Development: An Implementation Guide. Addison-Wesley, Reading (2006)
Sutherland, J., Jakobsen, C.R., Johnson, K.: Scrum and CMMI Level 5: The Magic Potion for Code Warriors. In: AGILE Conference, pp. 272–278 (2007)
Systematic A/S Web site, http://www.systematic.com/ (accessed, June 2010)
Zhu, L., Staples, M., Jeffery, R.: Scaling Up Software Architecture Evaluation Processes. In: Wang, Q., Pfahl, D., Raffo, D.M. (eds.) ICSP 2008. LNCS, vol. 5007, pp. 112–122. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2010 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Christensen, H.B., Hansen, K.M., Lindstrøm, B. (2010). Lightweight and Continuous Architectural Software Quality Assurance Using the aSQA Technique. In: Babar, M.A., Gorton, I. (eds) Software Architecture. ECSA 2010. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 6285. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-15114-9_11
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-15114-9_11
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-15113-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-15114-9
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)