Advertisement

Towards Configurable ISO/IEC 29110-Compliant Software Development Processes for Very Small Entities

  • Quentin Boucher
  • Gilles Perrouin
  • Jean-Christophe Deprez
  • Patrick Heymans
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 301)

Abstract

Using ISO/IEC 29110, very small entities (VSEs) can perform a step-wise increment of their software process by switching between the different ISO/ IEC profiles. However, ISO/IEC 29110 provides no guidance on how to switch between profiles incrementally, other than resorting to costly software development process experts unaffordable for VSEs. To address this shortcoming, this paper shows how to model the variability of currently available ISO/IEC 29110 profiles in an integrated and configurable workflow with illustration on the Requirements Engineering (RE) activity. This workflow is linked to a questionnaire used to support automated process configuration. Thereby, the user can easily derive the ISO/IEC-compliant processes to switch between profiles incrementally. The feasibility of this approach is shown using open-source workflow management tools Synergia and YAWL.

Keywords

Workflow Management Configuration ISO/IEC 29110 Requirements Processes 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Humphrey, W.S.: Managing the Software Process. Addison-Wesley (1989)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Electronics Industry Association: IEEE/EIA 12207 - industry implementation of international standard iso/iec 12207 (1998)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    ISO/IEC: ISO/IEC 29110 – Lifecycle Profiles for Very Small Entities (VSEs) (2010)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Laporte, C.Y., Alexandre, S., Renault, A.: Developing international standards for very small enterprises. IEEE Computer 41, 98–101 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Laporte, C.Y.: Contributions au génie logiciel et au développement et déploiement de normes internationales en génie logiciel pour de très petites organisations. PhD thesis, UBO, France (2009)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Saliou, P., Ribaud, V.: Iso-standardized requirements activities for very small entities. In: Requirements Engineering in Small Companies, pp. 145–157 (2010)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Alexandre, S., Laporte, C.Y.: Deployment package: Software requirements analysis - basic profile. Technical report, CETIC (Belgium) and ETS (Canada) (2007)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gottschalk, F., Van Der Aalst, W., Jansen-Vullers, M.H., La Rosa, M.: Configurable workflow models. International Journal of Cooperative Information Systems 17(2), 177–221 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    La Rosa, M., Lux, J., Seidel, S., Dumas, M., ter Hofstede, A.H.M.: Questionnaire-driven Configuration of Reference Process Models. In: Krogstie, J., Opdahl, A.L., Sindre, G. (eds.) CAiSE 2007 and WES 2007. LNCS, vol. 4495, pp. 424–438. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    La Rosa, M., Gottschalk, F.: Synergia - Comprehensive Tool Support for Configurable Process Models. In: BPM, Demos (2009)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Brinkkemper, S.: Method engineering: engineering of information systems development methods and tools. Information and Software Technology 38(4), 275–280 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Henderson-Sellers, B., Ralyté, J.: Situational method engineering: state-of-the-art review. Journal of Universal Computer Science 16(3), 424–478 (2010)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Van De Weerd, I., Versendaal, J., Brinkkemper, S.: A product software knowledge infrastructure for situational capability maturation: Vision and case studies in product management. In: Proceedings of REFSQ 2006, pp. 97–112. Springer (2006)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mirandolle, D., van de Weerd, I., Brinkkemper, S.: Incremental Method Engineering for Process Improvement - A Case Study. In: Ralyté, J., Mirbel, I., Deneckère, R. (eds.) ME 2011. IFIP AICT, vol. 351, pp. 4–18. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bekkers, W., van de Weerd, I., Spruit, M., Brinkkemper, S.: A Framework for Process Improvement in Software Product Management. In: Riel, A., O’Connor, R., Tichkiewitch, S., Messnarz, R. (eds.) EuroSPI 2010. CCIS, vol. 99, pp. 1–12. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Karlsson, F., Agerfalk, P.: Method configuration: adapting to situational characteristics while creating reusable assets. Information and Software Technology 46(9), 619–633 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kelly, S., Lyytinen, K., Rossi, M.: Metaedit+ A Fully Configurable Multi-user and Multi-tool Case and Came Environment. In: Constantopoulos, P., Vassiliou, Y., Mylopoulos, J. (eds.) CAiSE 1996. LNCS, vol. 1080, pp. 1–21. Springer, Heidelberg (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Cervera, M., Albert, M., Torres, V., Pelechano, V.: A Methodological Framework and Software Infrastructure for the Construction of Software Production Methods. In: Münch, J., Yang, Y., Schäfer, W. (eds.) ICSP 2010. LNCS, vol. 6195, pp. 112–125. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    ter Hofstede, A.H.M., van der Aalst, W.M.P., Adams, M., Russell, N.: Modern Business Process Automation - YAWL and its Support Environment. Springer (2010)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Pohl, K., Böckle, G., van der Linden, F.J.: Software Product Line Engineering: Foundations, Principles and Techniques. Springer-Verlag New York, Inc. (2005)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Gottschalk, F., Wagemakers, T.A.C., Jansen-Vullers, M.H., van der Aalst, W.M.P., La Rosa, M.: Configurable Process Models: Experiences from a Municipality Case Study. In: van Eck, P., Gordijn, J., Wieringa, R. (eds.) CAiSE 2009. LNCS, vol. 5565, pp. 486–500. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ralyté, J., Mirbel, I., Deneckère, R. (eds.): ME 2011. IFIP AICT, vol. 351. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    van der Aalst, W., Pesic, M., Schonenberg, H.: Declarative workflows: Balancing between flexibility and support. Computer Science - Research and Development 23, 99–113 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Quentin Boucher
    • 1
  • Gilles Perrouin
    • 1
  • Jean-Christophe Deprez
    • 2
  • Patrick Heymans
    • 1
    • 3
  1. 1.PReCISE Research CentreUniversity of NamurBelgium
  2. 2.Centre of Excellence in Information and Communication TechnologiesBelgium
  3. 3.INRIA Lille-Nord Europe, Université Lille 1 – LIFL – CNRSFrance

Personalised recommendations