Evolving a software process without a retrospective on its evolution and, in consequence, without an appropriate understanding, can lead to important problems for a software development organization. Two examples of such problems are inefficient performance as a consequence of the arbitrary introduction of changes or difficulty in demonstrating compliance to a given standard. Capturing information on the rationale underlying process changes provides a means for better understanding process evolution. This article presents two studies aimed at understanding and identifying information needs for describing the rationale for process evolution. Additionally, it presents an approach for incrementally evolving processes supported by this rationale. This approach is derived from the results of the studies and a survey of related work. An application of the approach during the evolution of a reference process for developing service-oriented applications is presented together with experience and open questions for future research work
Defining organization-specific process standards by integrating, harmonizing, and standardizing heterogeneous and often implicit processes is an important task, especially for large development organizations. On the one hand, such a standard must be generic enough to cover all of the organization's development activities; on the other hand, it must be as detailed and precise as possible to support employees' daily work. Today, organizations typically maintain and advance a plethora of individual processes, each addressing specific problems. This requires enormous effort, which could be spent more efficiently. This article introduces an approach to developing a Software Process Line that, similar to a Software Product Line, promises to reduce the complexity and thus, the effort required for managing the processes of a software organization. We propose as majors steps Scoping, Modeling, and Architecting the Software Process Line, and describe in detail the Scoping approach werecommend, based on an analysis of the potential products to be produced in the future, the projects expected for the future, and the respective process capabilities needed. In addition, the article sketches experience from determining the scope of space process standards for satellite software development. Finally, it discusses the approach, and related work, conclusions, and an outlook on future work are presented
Abstract. Defining process standards by integrating, harmonizing, and standardizing heterogeneous and often implicit processes is an important task, especially for large development organizations. However, many challenges exist, such as limiting the scope of process standards, coping with different levels of process model abstraction, and identifying relevant process variabilities to be included in the standard. On the one hand, eliminating process variability by building more abstract models with higher degrees of interpretation has many disadvantages, such as less control over the process. Integrating all kinds of variability, on the other hand, leads to high process deployment costs. This article describes requirements and concepts for determining the scope of process standards based on a characterization of the potential products to be produced in the future, the projects expected for the future, and the respective process capabilities needed. In addition, the article sketches experience from determining the scope of space process standards for satellite software development. Finally, related work with respect to process model scoping, conclusions, and an outlook on future work are presented.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.