Your browser does not support JavaScript!
http://iet.metastore.ingenta.com
1887

access icon free Empirical study of software component integration process activities

© The Institution of Engineering and Technology
Received 04/08/2012, Accepted 23/01/2013, Revised 19/10/2012, Published

The component integration phase is key to component-based system (CBS) success because of its profound impact on the quality of a software product. However, CBS integration is a complex phase because it is rarely the case that components are perfectly matched and ready for ‘plug and play’. The component integration phase involves assembling pre-existing software components usually developed by different parties, and writing glue-code to handle the mismatches between CBS-to-be requirements and available component features. The objective of the study is to gain an in-depth understanding of the impact of integration process activities on the overall success of a CBS. The empirical study also investigates the inter-dependency between the CBS integration process activities. A survey was developed and data from CBS practitioners working in small-to-medium-sized organisations were collected. The results show that ‘component functional specification’, ‘structural compatibility analysis’, ‘architectural model development’ and ‘early glue-code specification’ are integration process activities that have positive correlation with the successful development of a CBS. However, the results indicate that the ‘quality properties analysis’ is not carried out as an integration process activity by the majority of CBS practitioners during development of a CBS. Furthermore, the results of the survey also provide empirical evidence that there is a positive association between various key CBS integration process activities.

Inspec keywords: small-to-medium enterprises; object-oriented programming

Other keywords: small to medium sized organisation; quality property analysis; structural compatibility analysis; software product quality; component based system; component integration phase; component functional specification; glue code specification; software component integration process activity; architectural model development; CBS integration process activity

Subjects: Object-oriented programming

References

    1. 1)
      • 14. Dietrich, S.W., Patil, R., Sundermier, A., Urban, S.D.: ‘Component adaptation for event-based application integration using active rules’, J. Syst. Softw., 2006, 79, (12), pp. 1725–1734 (doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2006.03.015).
    2. 2)
      • 27. Mahmood, S., Khan, A.: ‘An industrial study on the importance of software component documentation: a system integrators perspective’, Inf. Process. Lett., 2011, 12, pp. 583–590 (doi: 10.1016/j.ipl.2011.03.012).
    3. 3)
      • 8. Hummel, O., Atkinson, C.: ‘Automated creation and assessment of component adapters with test cases’, 2010 (LNCS, 6092), pp. 166–181.
    4. 4)
      • 33. Land, R., Sundmark, D., Luders, F., Krasteva, I., Causevic, A.: ‘Reuse with software components – a survey of industrial state of practice’, 2009(LNCS, 5791), pp. 150–159.
    5. 5)
      • 15. Kim, S., Park, S., Yun, J., Lee, Y.: ‘Automated continuous integration of component-based software: an industrial experience’. Proc. 23rd IEEE/ACM Int. Conf. Automated Software Engineering, 2008, pp. 423–426.
    6. 6)
      • 7. Alves, C.: ‘Cots based requirements engineering’. Component Based Software Quality, 2003 (LNCS, 2693), pp. 21–39.
    7. 7)
      • 31. Kusumo, D., Staples, M., Zhu, L., Zhang, H., Jeffery, R.: ‘Risks of off-the-shelf-based software acquisition and development: a systematic mapping study and a survey’. Proc. 16th Int. Conf. Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering, 2012, pp. 233–242.
    8. 8)
      • 38. Mendenhall, W., Sincich, T.: ‘Statistics for engineering and the sciences’ (Pearson Education, 2007).
    9. 9)
      • 20. Kotonya, G., Rashid, A.: ‘A strategy for managing risk in component-based software development’. Proc. 27th Euromicro Conf.: A Net Odyssey, 2001, pp. 12–21.
    10. 10)
      • 29. Ayala, C.P., Cruzes, D., Hauge, O., Conradi, R.: ‘Five facts on the adoption of open software’, IEEE Softw., 2011, 28, (2), pp. 95–99 (doi: 10.1109/MS.2011.32).
    11. 11)
      • 32. Li, J., Conradi, R., Siyngstad, O.P.N., Bunse, C., Torchiano, M., Morisio, M.: ‘Development with off-the-shelf components: 10 facts’, IEEE Softw., 2009, 26, (2), pp. 80–87 (doi: 10.1109/MS.2009.33).
    12. 12)
      • 22. Rose, L.: ‘Risk management in component-based system development’, Compon. Based Softw. Qual., Methods Tech., 2003, 2693, pp. 352–373 (doi: 10.1007/978-3-540-45064-1_16).
    13. 13)
      • 3. Khan, M.A., Mahmood, S.: ‘A graph based requirements clustering approach for component selection’, Adv. Eng. Softw., 2012, 54, pp. 1–16 (doi: 10.1016/j.advengsoft.2012.08.002).
    14. 14)
      • 6. Boehm, B., Abts, C.: ‘Cots integration: plug and pray?’, IEEE Comput., 1999, 32, (1), pp. 135–138 (doi: 10.1109/2.738311).
    15. 15)
      • 30. Stol, K.-J., Babar, M.A., Avgeriou, P.: ‘The importance of architectural knowledge in integrating open source software’, IFP Adv. Inf. Commun. Technol., 2011, 365, pp. 142–158 (doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-24418-6_10).
    16. 16)
      • 39. Corder, G.W, Foreman, D.I: ‘Nonparametric statistics for non-statisticians: a step-by-step approach’ (Wiley, 2009).
    17. 17)
      • 10. Liu, Y., Liang, X., Xu, L., Staples, M., Zhu, L.: ‘Composing enterprise mashup components and services using architecture integration patterns’, J. Syst. Softw., 2011, 84, (9), pp. 1436–1446 (doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2011.01.030).
    18. 18)
      • 35. Pfleeger, S.L., Kitchenham, B.A.: ‘Principles of survey research: parts 1–6’. ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes, 2001.
    19. 19)
      • 40. Taulavuori, A., Niemela, E., Kallio, P.: ‘Component documentation a key issue in software product lines’, Inf. Softw. Technol., 2004, 46, (8), pp. 535–546 (doi: 10.1016/j.infsof.2003.10.004).
    20. 20)
      • 36. Wang, E.T., Shih, S.-P., Jiang, J.J., Klein, G.: ‘The relative influence of management control and user-is personnel interaction on project performance’, Inf. Softw. Technol., 2006, 48, pp. 214–220 (doi: 10.1016/j.infsof.2005.04.003).
    21. 21)
      • 23. Frakes, W., Fox, C.: ‘Sixteen questions about software reuse’, Commun. ACM, 1995, 38, (6), pp. 75–87 (doi: 10.1145/203241.203260).
    22. 22)
      • 37. Ahmed, F., Capretz, L.F.: ‘The software product line architecture: an empirical investigation of key process activities’, Inf. Softw. Technol., 2008, 50, pp. 1098–1113 (doi: 10.1016/j.infsof.2007.10.013).
    23. 23)
      • 26. Li, J., Conradi, R., Slyngstad, O.P., Torchiano, M., Morisio, M., Bunse, C.: ‘A state-of-the-practice survey of risk management in development with off-the-shelf software components’, IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng., 2008, 34, (2), pp. 271–286 (doi: 10.1109/TSE.2008.14).
    24. 24)
      • 17. Assman, U.: ‘A component model for invasive composition’. ECOOP 2000 Workshop on Aspects and Dimensions of Concerns, Cannes, France, 2000.
    25. 25)
      • 41. Robson, C.: ‘Real world research: a resource for social scientists and practioner researchers’ (John Wiley and Sons, 2011).
    26. 26)
      • 25. Li, J., Bjornson, F.O., Conradi, R., Kampenes, V.B.: ‘An empirical study of variations in cots-based software development processes in the Norwegian it industry’, Empir. Softw. Eng., 2006, 11, (3), pp. 433–461 (doi: 10.1007/s10664-006-9005-5).
    27. 27)
      • 18. Suvee, D., Vanderperren, W., Jonckers, V.: ‘Jasco: an aspect-oriented approach tailored for component based software development’. Proc. Second Int. Conf. Aspect-Oriented Software Development, Boston, USA, 2003, pp. 21–29.
    28. 28)
      • 1. Szyperski, C., Gruntz, D., Murer, S.: ‘Component software – beyond object – oriented programming’ (Addison-Wesley, 2002, 2nd edn.).
    29. 29)
      • 12. Crnkovic, I., Larsson, S., Chaudron, M.: ‘Component-based development process and component lifecycle’, J. Comput. Inf. Technol., 2005, 13, pp. 321–327 (doi: 10.2498/cit.2005.04.10).
    30. 30)
      • 24. Torchiano, M., Morisio, M.: ‘Overlooked facts on cots-based development’, IEEE Softw., 2004, 21, (2), pp. 88–93 (doi: 10.1109/MS.2004.1270770).
    31. 31)
      • 28. Host, M., OrucevicAlagic, A., Runeson, P.: ‘Usage of open source in commercial software product development – findings from a focus group meeting’. Proc. 12th Int. Conf. Product-Focused Software Process Improvement, 2011, pp. 95–99.
    32. 32)
      • 4. Cechich, A., Piattini, M.: ‘Early detection of cots component functional suitability’, Inf. Softw. Technol., 2007, 49, (2), pp. 108–121 (doi: 10.1016/j.infsof.2006.03.008).
    33. 33)
      • 5. Mahmood, S.: ‘Usefulness of acceptance testing information for component-based system maintenance’, IET Softw., 2012, 6, (2), pp. 155–163 (doi: 10.1049/iet-sen.2011.0059).
    34. 34)
      • 19. Mahmood, S., Lai, R., Kim, Y.S.: ‘Survey of component based software development’, IET Softw., 2007, 1, (2), pp. 57–66 (doi: 10.1049/iet-sen:20060045).
    35. 35)
      • 21. Rashid, A., Kotonya, G.: ‘Risk management in component-based development: by separation of concerns’. ECOOP Workshop on Advanced Separation of Concerns, 2001.
    36. 36)
      • 13. Vitharana, P.: ‘Risks and challenges of component based software development’, Commun. ACM, 2003, 46, (8), pp. 67–72 (doi: 10.1145/859670.859671).
    37. 37)
      • 9. Jiao, W.: ‘Using autonomous components to improve runtime qualities of software’, IET Softw., 2011, 5, (1), pp. 1–20 (doi: 10.1049/iet-sen.2010.0001).
    38. 38)
      • 2. Kotlarsky, J., Oshri, I.: ‘Managing component-based development in global teams’ (Palgrave-Macmillan, 2009).
    39. 39)
      • 11. Aris, H., Salim, S.: ‘Framework for component model selection’, IET Softw., 2011, 5, (5), pp. 474–486 (doi: 10.1049/iet-sen.2010.0111).
    40. 40)
      • 16. Chi, Z.: ‘Software components composition compatibility checking based on behaviour description’. IEEE Int. Conf. Granular Computing, 2009, pp. 757–760.
    41. 41)
      • 34. Ayala, C., Hauge, O., Conradi, R., Franch, X., Li, J.: ‘Selection of third party software in off-the-shelf software development – an interview study with industrial practitioners’, J. Syst. Softw., 2011, 84, (4), pp. 620–637 (doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2010.10.019).
http://iet.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1049/iet-sen.2012.0120
Loading

Related content

content/journals/10.1049/iet-sen.2012.0120
pub_keyword,iet_inspecKeyword,pub_concept
6
6
Loading
Print this page
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address