Experiences in assessing product family software architecture for evolution

ABSTRACT

Software architecture assessments are a means to detect architectural problems before the bulk of development work is done. They facilitate planning of improvement activities early in the lifecycle and allow limiting the changes on any existing software. This is particularly beneficial when the architecture has been planned to (or already does) support a whole product family, or a set of products that share common requirements, architecture, components or code. As the family requirements evolve and new products are added, the need to assess the evolvability of the existing architecture is vital. I illustrate two assessment case studies I have recently worked on in the mobile telephone software domain: the Symbian operating system platform and the network resource access control software system. The former assessment has been carried out as a task within the European project ESAPS, while the latter has been performed solely by Nokia. By means of simple experimental data, I show evidence of the usefulness of architectural assessment as rated by the participating stakeholders. Both assessments have led to the identification of previously unknown architectural defects, and to the consequent planning of improvement initiatives. In both cases, stakeholders noted that a number of side benefits, including improvement of communication and architectural documentation, were also of considerable importance. I illustrate the lessons we have learned, and outline suggestions for future research and experimentation.

REFERENCES

• 1: Jan Bosch, Design and use of software architectures: adopting and evolving a product-line approach, ACM Press/Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., New York, NY, 2000
• 2: Mehdi Jazayeri , Alexander Ran , Frank van der Linden, Software architecture for product families: principles and practice, Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc., Boston, MA, 2000
• 3: ESAPS project official web site. http://www.esi.es/esaps/
• 4: Kazman, R., Klein, M., Clements, P. ATAM: A Method for Architecture Evaluation. Technical Report CMU/SEI-2000-TR-004, Software Engineering Institute, Pittsburgh, PA, 2000.
• 5: Claudio Riva, Reverse Architecting: An Industrial Experience Report, Proceedings of the Seventh Working Conference on Reverse Engineering (WCRE'00), p.42, November 23-25, 2000
• 6: Symbian technology web page. http://www.symbian.com/technology/technology.html.
• 7: Rick Kazman , Gregory Abowd , Len Bass , Paul Clements, Scenario-Based Analysis of Software Architecture, IEEE Software, v.13 n.6, p.47-55, November 1996 [doi>10.1109/52.542294 ]
• 8: Bengtsson, P.O., Lassing, N., Bosch, J., van Vliet, H., Analyzing Software Architectures for Modifiability, Blekinge Institute of Technology Research Report 2000:11, ISSN: 1103-1581.
• 9: Jan Bosch , PerOlof Bengtsson, Assessing Optimal Software Architecture Maintainability, Proceedings of the Fifth European Conference on Software Maintenance and Reengineering, p.168, March 14-16, 2001
• 10: Clements, P., Kazman, R., Klein, M., Evaluating Software Architectures: Methods and Case Studies, Addison-Wesley, 2001.
• 11: Rick Kazman , S. Jeromy Carrière , Steven G. Woods, Toward a discipline of scenario-based architectural engineering, Annals of Software Engineering, v.9 n.1-4, p.5-33, 2000
• 12: Rick Kazman , Mark Klein , Paul Clements, Evaluating software architectures for real-time systems, Annals of Software Engineering, v.7 n.1-4, p.71-93, 1999
• 13: Stefan Ferber , Peter Heidl , Peter Lutz, Reviewing Product Line Architectures: Experience Report of ATAM in an Automotive Context, Revised Papers from the 4th International Workshop on Software Product-Family Engineering, p.364-382, October 03-05, 2001
• 14: Galal Hassan Galal, A Note on Scenarios in Software Architecting, Proceedings of the Workshop on Object-Oriented Technology, p.68, June 14-18, 1999
• 15: CAFÉ, http://www.itea-office.org/projects/cafe_fact.html
• 16: Booch, G., Conducting a software architecture assessment, Rational white paper, see http://www.rational.com/products/whitepapers/391.jsp

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  D. Software
  D.2 SOFTWARE ENGINEERING
        D.2.11 Software Architectures
            Subjects: Data abstraction

Additional Classification:
  D. Software
  D.2 SOFTWARE ENGINEERING
      D.2.5 Testing and Debugging
          Subjects: Code inspections and walk-throughs; Debugging aids

General Terms:
Algorithms, Design, Performance