No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Delivering increasingly complex software-reliant systems demands better ways to manage the long-term effects of shortterm expedients. The technical debt metaphor is gaining significant traction in the agile development community as a way to understand and communicate such issues. The idea is that developers sometimes accept compromises in a system in one dimension (e.g., modularity) to meet an urgent demand in some other dimension (e.g., a deadline), and that such compromises incur a "debt": on which "interest" has to be paid and which the "principal" should be repaid at some point for the long-term health of the project. We argue that the software engineering research community has an opportunity to study and improve this concept. We can offer software engineers a foundation for managing such trade-offs based on models of their economic impacts. Therefore, we propose managing technical debt as a part of the future research agenda for the software engineering field

No abstract

We compare five industrial software architecture design methods and we extract from their commonalities a general software architecture design approach. Using this general approach, we compare across the five methods the artifacts and activities they use or recommend, and we pinpoint similarities and differences. Once we get beyond the great variance in terminology and description, we find that the five approaches have a lot in common and match more or less the ''ideal'' pattern we introduced. From the ideal pattern we derive an evaluation grid that can be used for further method comparisons.

No abstract

Abstract:This paper describes our experience using UML, the Unified Modeling Language, to describe the software architecture of a system. We found that it works well for communicating the static structure of the architecture: the elements of the architecture, their relations, and the variability of a structure. These static properties are much more readily described with it than the dynamic properties. We could easily describe a particular sequence of activities, but not a general sequence. In addition, the ability to show peer-topeer communication is missing from UML.