Abstract
Software variability modelling (SVM) has become a central concern in software product lines – especially configurable software product lines (CSPL) require rigorous SVM. Dynamic SPLs, service oriented SPLs, and autonomous or pervasive systems are examples where CSPLs are applied. Knowledge-based configuration (KBC) is an established way to address variability modelling aiming for the automatic product configuration of physical products. Our aim was to study what major ideas from KBC can be applied to SVM, particularly in the context of CSPLs. Our main contribution is the identification of major ideas from KBC that could be applied to SVM. First, we call for the separation of types and instances. Second, conceptual clarity of modelling concepts, e.g., having both taxonomical and compositional relations would be useful. Third, we argue for the importance of a conceptual basis that provides a foundation for multiple representations, e.g., graphical and textual. Applying the insights and experiences embedded in these ideas may help in the development of modelling support for software product lines, particularly in terms of conceptual clarity and as a basis for tool support with a high level of automation.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Benavides, D., Felfernig, A., Galindo, J.A., Reinfrank, F.: Automated analysis in feature modelling and product configuration. In: Favaro, J., Morisio, M. (eds.) ICSR 2013. LNCS, vol. 7925, pp. 160–175. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)
Benavides, D., Segura, S., Ruiz-Cortés, A.: Automated analysis of feature models 20 years later: a literature review. Inf. Syst. 35(6), 615–636 (2010)
Bosch, J.: Maturity and evolution in software product lines: approaches, artefacts and organization. In: Chastek, G.J. (ed.) SPLC 2002. LNCS, vol. 2379, pp. 257–271. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)
Chen, L., Ali Babar, M.: A systematic review of evaluation of variability management approaches in software product lines. IST 53(4), 344–362 (2011)
Clements, P., Northrop, L.: Software Product Lines Practices and Patterns. Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc., Boston (2001)
Czarnecki, K., Helsen, S., Eisenecker, U.: Formalizing cardinality-based feature models and their specialization. Softw. Process Improv. Pract. 10(1), 7–29 (2005)
Deelstra, S., Sinnema, M., Bosch, J.: Product derivation in software product families: a case study. J. Syst. Softw. 74(2), 173–194 (2005)
Eichelberger, H., Schmid, K.: Mapping the design-space of textual variability modeling languages: a refined analysis. Int. J. Softw. Tools Technol. Transf. (2014)
Felfernig, A., Friedrich, G.E., Jannach, D.: UML as domain specific language for the construction of knowledge-based configuration systems. Int. J. Softw. Eng. Knowl. Eng. 10(4), 449–469 (2000)
Felfernig, A., Hotz, L., Bagley, C., Tiihonen, J. (eds.): Knowledge-Based Configuration: From Research to Business Cases. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (2014)
Hotz, L., Felfernig, A., Stumptner, M., Ryabokon, A., Bagley, C., Wolter, K.: Configuration knowledge representation and reasoning. In: Felfernig, A., Hotz, L., Bagley, C., Tiihonen, J. (eds.) Knowledge-Based Configuration: From Research to Business Cases, pp. 41–72. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (2014)
Hubaux, A., Jannach, D., Drescher, C., Murta, L., Männistö, T., Czarnecki, K., Heymans, P., Nguyen, T., Zanker, M.: Unifying software and product configuration: a research roadmap. In: ECAI 2012 Workshop on Configuration, pp. 31–35 (2012)
Kang, K., Cohen, S., Hess, J., Novak, W., Peterson, S.: Feature-oriented domain analysis feasibility study (FODA). Technical report CMU/SEI-90-TR-021, Carnegie Mellon U., Software Engineering Institute, Pittsburgh, PA, USA (1990)
Männistö, T., Soininen, T., Sulonen, R.: Product configuration view to software product families. In: ICSE Software Configuration Management Workshop (2001)
Pohl, K., Böckle, G., van der Linden, F.: Software Product Line Engineering: Foundations, Principles, and Techniques. Springer, New York (2005)
Schmid, K., Rabiser, R., Grünbacher, P.: A comparison of decision modeling approaches in product lines. In: 5th Workshop on Variability Modeling of Software-Intensive Systems, pp. 119–126. ACM, New York (2011)
Schobbens, P.-Y., Heymans, P., Trigaux, J.-C., Bontemps, Y.: Generic semantics of feature diagrams. Comput. Netw. 51(2), 456–479 (2007)
Soininen, T., Tiihonen, J., Männistö, T., Sulonen, R.: Towards a general ontology of configuration. AI EDAM 12(04), 357–372 (1998)
Svahnberg, M., van Gurp, J., Bosch, J.: A taxononomy of variability realization techniques. Softw. Pract. Experience 35(8), 705–754 (2005)
Tiihonen, J., Heiskala, M., Anderson, A., Soininen, T.: WeCoTin–A practical logic-based sales configurator. AI Commun. 26(1), 99–131 (2013)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this paper
Cite this paper
Tiihonen, J., Raatikainen, M., Myllärniemi, V., Männistö, T. (2016). Carrying Ideas from Knowledge-Based Configuration to Software Product Lines. In: Kapitsaki, G., Santana de Almeida, E. (eds) Software Reuse: Bridging with Social-Awareness. ICSR 2016. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 9679. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-35122-3_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-35122-3_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-35121-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-35122-3
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)