skip to main content
10.1145/2110147.2110149acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesvamosConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Formalizing distributed evolution of variability in information system ecosystems

Authors Info & Claims
Published:25 January 2012Publication History

ABSTRACT

The open variability of software product line ecosystems allows customers and third party organizations to create extensions to a system which may refine the variability model. In this paper we will describe an approach to evolution support, which was developed in the context of one specific company, HIS GmbH. However, the approach is much more generic than this. In particular, it is based on the formalization of modifications to configuration values and constraints on both the model and the data in the context of the evolution of multi-level configurations. Our approach supports the identification of inconsistencies in evolution.

References

  1. M. Anastasopoulos, D. Muthig, T. Burgos de Oliveira, E. Almeida, and S. Romero de Lemos Meira. Evolving a software product line reuse infrastructure a configuration management solution. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop on Variability Modelling of Software-intensive Systems (VaMoS '09), 2009.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. S. Apel, J. Liebig, C. Lengauer, C. Kästner, and W. Cook. Semistructured merge in revision control systems. In Proceedings of the 4th International Workshop on Variability Modelling of Software-intensive Systems (VaMoS '10), pages 13--19, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. J. Bosch. Maturity and evolution in software product lines: Approaches, artefacts and organization. In Proceedings of the 2nd Conference Software Product Line Conference (SPLC'02), pages 257--271, 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. J. Bosch. From software product lines to software ecosystems. In Proceedings of the 13th International Software Product Line Conference (SPLC'09), pages 111--119, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. H. Brummermann, M. Keunecke, and K. Schmid. Variability issues in the evolution of information system ecosystems. In Proceedings of the 5th Workshop on Variability Modeling of Software-Intensive Systems, pages 159--164, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Y. C. Cavalcanti, I. do Carmo Machado, P. A. da Mota, S. Neto, L. L. Lobato, E. S. de Almeida, and S. R. de Lemos Meira. Towards metamodel support for variability and traceability in software product lines. In Proceedings of the 5th Workshop on Variability Modelling of Software-Intensive Systems (VaMoS '11), pages 49--57, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. A. Classen, A. Hubaux, and P. Heymans. A formal semantics for multi-level staged configuration. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop on Variability Modelling of Software-intensive Systems (VaMoS '09), pages 51--60, 2009.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. P. Clements and L. Northrop. Software product lines: Practices and patterns. Addison-Wesley, 2001. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. K. Czarnecki, S. Helsen, and U. Eisenecker. Staged configuration through specialization and multi-level configuration of feature models. Software Process: Improvement and Practice, 10(2):143--169, 2005.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. N. Gamez and L. Fuentes. Software product line evolution with cardinality-based feature models. In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Software Reuse, (ICSR '11), pages 102--118, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. C. Krueger. Towards a taxonomy for software product lines. In Proceedings of the 5th International Workshop Software Product-Family Engineering (PFE '03), volume 3014 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 323--331. 2004.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. C. Krueger. New methods in software product line development. In Proceedings of the 10th International Software Product Line Conference (SPLC '06), pages 95--102, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. R. Mazo, P. Grünbacher, W. Heider, R. Rabiser, C. Salinesi, and D. Diaz. Using constraint programming to verify DOPLER variability models. In Proceedings of the 5th Workshop on Variability Modelling of Software-Intensive Systems (VaMoS '11), pages 97--103, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. M. Schäler, T. Leich, N. Siegmund, C. Kästner, and G. Saake. Generierung maßgeschneiderter Relationenschemata in Softwareproduktlinien mittels Superimposition. 14. GI-Fachtagung Datenbanksysteme für Business, Technologie und Web, pages 250--261, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. K. Schmid. Variability modeling for distributed development --- a comparison with established practice. In Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Software Product Line Engineering (SPLC'10), pages 155--165, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. K. Schmid and H. Eichelberger. Model-based implementation of meta-variability constructs: A case study using aspects. In Proceedings of the 2rd International Workshop on Variability Modelling of Software-intensive Systems (VaMoS '08), pages 63--71, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. N. Siegmund, C. Kästner, M. Rosenmüller, F. Heidenreich, S. Apel, and G. Saake. Bridging the gap between variability in client application and database schema. 13. GI-Fachtagung Datenbanksysteme für Business, Technologie und Web, pages 297--306, 2009.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. R. Stoiber and M. Glinz. Supporting stepwise, incremental product derivation in product line requirements engineering. In Proceedings of the 4th International Workshop on Variability Modelling of Software-intensive Systems (VaMoS '10), pages 77--84, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. F. v. d. Linden, K. Schmid, and E. Rommes. Software product lines in action: the best industrial practice in product line engineering. Springer, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. R. van Ommering. Building product populations with software components. Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE '02), pages 255--265, 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Formalizing distributed evolution of variability in information system ecosystems

            Recommendations

            Comments

            Login options

            Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

            Sign in
            • Published in

              cover image ACM Other conferences
              VaMoS '12: Proceedings of the 6th International Workshop on Variability Modeling of Software-Intensive Systems
              January 2012
              193 pages
              ISBN:9781450310581
              DOI:10.1145/2110147

              Copyright © 2012 ACM

              Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

              Publisher

              Association for Computing Machinery

              New York, NY, United States

              Publication History

              • Published: 25 January 2012

              Permissions

              Request permissions about this article.

              Request Permissions

              Check for updates

              Qualifiers

              • research-article

              Acceptance Rates

              Overall Acceptance Rate66of147submissions,45%

            PDF Format

            View or Download as a PDF file.

            PDF

            eReader

            View online with eReader.

            eReader