usccse2000-515 - Refinement and Evolution Issues between...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Refinement and Evolution Issues between Requirements and Product Line Architectures 1 Refinement and Evolution Issues in Bridging Requirements and Architectures Alexander Egyed, Paul Gruenbacher, and Nenad Medvidovic University of Southern California, Computer Science Department, Los Angeles, CA 90089-0781, USA {aegyed, gruenbac, neno} Abstract. Though acknowledged as very closely related, to a large extent re- quirements engineering and architecture modeling have been pursued independ- ently of one another, particularly in the large body of software architecture re- search that has emerged over the past decade. The dependencies and constraints imposed by elements of one on those of the other are not well understood. This paper identifies a number of relevant relationships we have identified in the process of trying to relate the WinWin requirements engineering approach with architecture and design-centered approaches (e.g., C2 and UML). This paper further discusses their relevance towards product line issues which currently are obscured by the fusion of product-specific and product-line information. 1 Introduction Requirements negotiation and elaboration success addresses issues such as identify- ing critical stakeholders, capturing stakeholder goals and concerns, discovering con- flicts between stakeholder concerns, and addressing those conflicts by identifying suitable options for resolving them. Architectural modeling, on the other hand, deals with issues such as defining components, connectors, and systems, as well as their properties and roles. The software engineering community has not failed to notice a natural gap between the two tasks of requirements negotiation and architecting. Despite extensive attention, this gap remains. Effectively, transitioning from requirements to an architecture is still an unsolved problem. People have found that this task becomes more manageable in a waterfall-like situation where requirements are clearly specified and completed before the actual product is built. The drawback of a waterfall approach is that most projects exhibit strong iterative features. The complex task of refining requirements to an ar- chitecture is therefore made even more difficult by having to consider continuous evolution. In order to deal with this issue, we have created a systematic approach for refining a system’s requirements to its architecture, called CBSP [7]. CBSP stands for Compo- nent , Bus ( Connector ), System , and Property . A CBSP-enabled development approach aims at identifying and qualifying requirements that are architecturally relevant with
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Refinement and Evolution Issues between Requirements and Product Line Architectures 2 respect to those four properties. Initially, we created CBSP to support traditional archi- tecture-based software development without an explicit focus on product lines. Figure 1 (left) depicts at a high level development with and without CBSP. CBSP refinement, which will be discussed in more detail shortly, simplifies the refinement from re-
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 06/16/2009 for the course CSCI 578 taught by Professor Nenadmedidovic during the Spring '08 term at USC.

Page1 / 9

usccse2000-515 - Refinement and Evolution Issues between...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online