International Software Process Workshop最新文献_第5页

S-RaP: A Concurrent, Evolutionary Software Prototyping Process S-RaP:一个并发的、进化的软件原型过程

International Software Process Workshop Pub Date : 2005-05-25 DOI: 10.1007/11608035_16

Xiping Song, Arnold Rudorfer, B. Hwong, Gilberto Matos, Christopher Nelson

引用次数: 3

Process Definition Language Support for Rapid Simulation Prototyping 快速仿真原型的过程定义语言支持

International Software Process Workshop Pub Date : 2005-05-25 DOI: 10.1007/11608035_34

M. Raunak, L. Osterweil

引用次数: 5

Requirements and Early Experiences in the Implementation of the SPADE Repository 实现SPADE存储库的需求和早期经验

International Software Process Workshop Pub Date : 1993-11-04 DOI: 10.1007/3-540-57342-9_92

S. Bandinelli, L. Baresi, A. Fuggetta, L. Lavazza

引用次数: 17

Process Evolution in the Marvel Environment Marvel环境中的过程演化

International Software Process Workshop Pub Date : 1992-11-08 DOI: 10.21236/ada267813

G. Kaiser, I. Ben-Shaul

引用次数: 30

Policies (session summary) 策略(会话摘要)

International Software Process Workshop Pub Date : 1990-10-01 DOI: 10.5555/317498.317689

P. Feiler

{"title":"Policies (session summary)","authors":"P. Feiler","doi":"10.5555/317498.317689","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5555/317498.317689","url":null,"abstract":"The session on policies was led by Mark Dowson as keynoter. A more detailed description of this session was phrased as “Discussion of experience with domains in actual models — the semantic concerns of process models. What are lessons to be learned about model specific semantics? Model independent semantics?”.\u0000In his presentation Mark Dowson focused on the term policies. Policies were described as constraints that facilitate coordinated performance of process steps by multiple agents. Different kinds of policies exist, and there are different forms of policies. Issues regarding the relationship between policies and processes were raised, and ways of applying policies were discussed. Formal and informal as well as automated and manual policies and processes involving humans both at the organizational level and at the level of individuals were considered.\u0000The discussion generated by the presentation was lively. Examples of processes and policies in a variety of domains including non-software engineering domains were presented. A spectrum of terms were used for the notion of policy ranging from laws and standards to procedures and methods. In the following the reader will find a capsule summary of the findings. This summary does not reflect the flow of the discussions, nor does it include all the examples mentioned. Instead, the summary attempts to present the essence of the messages communicated by the participants by abstracting out some of the characteristics of policies.\u0000Policies can be described as constraints with respect to certain processes. They are statements either in terms of the notation describing the process, or in terms of a notation whose interpretation establishes a mapping to the process. There are different degrees of compliance to these constraints and there are a number of ways this compliance can be achieved. In different domains people have identified constraints with certain characteristics and given them special labels. This was evident in the discussion by the usage of terms such as advice, culture, guideline, goal, law, method, objective, order, policy, practice, preference, procedure, rule, standard, strategy, etc. Some of these terms imply particular degrees of compliance and forms of enforcement, while others imply that the constraints apply to certain types of processes and that the constraints may be in terms of the process, in terms of an abstraction of the process, or in terms the process of managing the execution of a process — the latter two requiring interpretation to establish a mapping between the constraint and the process. In the remainder of this discussion we will use the term policy to mean a constraint.\u0000Processes and policies can be characterized according to whether they have an explicit or implicit representation, whether their representation is formal or informal, whether the process and the policies are described in the same of different representations, and whether they are interpreted manually or a","PeriodicalId":414925,"journal":{"name":"International Software Process Workshop","volume":"136 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1990-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115592083","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Emerging issues (session summary) 新出现的问题(会议摘要)

International Software Process Workshop Pub Date : 1990-10-01 DOI: 10.5555/317498.317692

D. Garlan

引用次数: 2

Data (session summary) 数据(会话汇总)

International Software Process Workshop Pub Date : 1990-10-01 DOI: 10.5555/317498.317690

M. Penedo

{"title":"Data (session summary)","authors":"M. Penedo","doi":"10.5555/317498.317690","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5555/317498.317690","url":null,"abstract":"This session addressed the object base and typing issues needed in support of the modeling and implementation of the life-cycle process. In this summary the terms process and life-cycle process are used interchangeably. However, I do not believe that was the case during the workshop; sometimes it seemed that the term process was used in an abstract way1, which led, at times, to some conceptual misunderstandings.\u0000Jack Wileden was the keynote speaker for the session. He started by trying to differentiate between two (2) roles in process modeling:The actual modeling of the process, i.e., how do we describe the process independent of its implementation.\u0000Process enaction and the environment needs in support of the process model descriptions.\u0000\u0000He felt most position papers dealt with the second role, even though a few talked about the first. There was not too much discussion with respect to the differences of those roles but performance was mentioned as a key issue for the second role.\u0000Wileden proceeded to distinguish an overall “world view” on data issues from specific dimensions of the data support problem (see section 2 for his list of specific dimensions). He listed several possible world views with respect to data in support of life-cycle processes, including: i) typed objects as in programming languages, ii) files (e.g., documents, code, etc), iii) traditional database view. He described his own view as based on the notion of an “object space” (i.e., collections of objects). This more modern view appears to be shared by many of the workshop participants, as reflected in many of the position papers. The group decided not to debate on the definition of the word object, but to consider it related to the concept of abstract data types. (Note: I like to think of objects as the units of data which are identifiable and accessible within a Software Engineering Environment (SEE) and of an Object Management System (OMS) as the SEE component whose objective is to manage those objects; a precise definition of an object is largely dependent on the type model provided by an OMS.)\u0000This session did not try to generate lists of issues or requirements. The objective seemed to be to discuss items which were felt important by the group. There were few agreements. Nonetheless, an emerging consensus seemed to be that the current state of the art and state of the practice in database management systems (or object management systems) do not support all the needs of process programming.\u0000This summary will concentrate on some of the key items and/or issues discussed, followed by some observations made during the session.","PeriodicalId":414925,"journal":{"name":"International Software Process Workshop","volume":"124 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1990-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133271588","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Control (session summary) 控制(会话摘要)

International Software Process Workshop Pub Date : 1990-10-01 DOI: 10.5555/317498.317691

D. Perry

{"title":"Control (session summary)","authors":"D. Perry","doi":"10.5555/317498.317691","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5555/317498.317691","url":null,"abstract":"Bob Balzer initiated the discussion with the contentious claim that planning languages are the proper basis for process models. He then divided the participants into two general camps according to their position papers: those for and those against the planning thesis with subgroups of zealots, believers and supporters.\u0000The argument for the thesis is exemplified by two approaches taken by the zealots: 1) [Huff's view] process definition as a plan instantiation — plan construction is subgoaling, envisionment is done via explicit pre and post conditions, and exceptions are handled via replanning; and 2) [Thomas' view] process as a goal-directed activity — where planning separates and systematizes execution dynamics from model dynamics and the paradigm is plan, instantiate, and replan. Balzer listed (by first author on the basis of the position papers) Curtis, Dieters, Heimbigner, Kaiser, Roberts and Balzer as believers in this position, and Boehm, Carr, Cheatham, Feiler, Finkelstein, Kishida, Lehman, Matsumoto, Nakajima, Redwine, Rombach, Scacchi, and Zave as supporters of this position.\u0000The argument against the thesis is exemplified by the process programming camp where it is held that process languages will strongly resemble programming languages and that properly conceived and developed environments can support both process and product development. Implicit in this approach is the claim that current languages are sufficient and that there is experience to support this claim. Balzer remarked that the examples in the position papers did not supply a sufficient basis for this claim. Unfortunately, Lee Osterweil had been unable to attend and support his position (though it was in fact supported rather eloquently by others). Garlan, Kellner, Nakagawa, Sugiyama and Wileden were listed by Balzer as believers, and Katayama was listed as a supporter. (Humphrey, Minksy, Penedo, and Reiss were listed as “other”.)\u0000The force fit into one of two camps was strongly objected to. Dowson noted that we need to look at the harder issues and support for them, provide abstract arguments and reasoning about them. There may be elements of planning languages and elements of standard languages in a multiparadigm environment. It was also noted that there was as little evidence on the planning paradigm side as was claimed for process programming. In particular, we have not seen any non-trivial plans.\u0000Finkelstein noted that the “pro” camp was anyone with a slightly AIish flavor and that his work stressed the local management of the process where the dominant features result from the manipulation of the minutia of work rather than of overall goals. Further we need to keep the methodic angle in full view — that is, we are concerned with more than just the invocation of tools.\u0000Further discussion centered on modeling and the levels of description required — for example, descriptions that range from very general goals to explicit, detailed descriptions of how things are to be don","PeriodicalId":414925,"journal":{"name":"International Software Process Workshop","volume":"11 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1990-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129518219","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Describing working environments in OPM 描述OPM中的工作环境

International Software Process Workshop Pub Date : 1990-10-01 DOI: 10.5555/317498.317749

Y. Sugiyama, E. Horowitz

{"title":"Describing working environments in OPM","authors":"Y. Sugiyama, E. Horowitz","doi":"10.5555/317498.317749","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5555/317498.317749","url":null,"abstract":"In OPM, each software process provides a working environment in which programmers can actually work in order to accomplish a designated task, rather than prescribing the algorithm of the task [1], or giving a behavioral description of the task [4]. A process will (i) collect necessary resources, (ii) collect necessary activities, and (iii) specify certain constraint on the execution of activities. A process will also (iv) navigate activities to be performed by a human, (v) execute activities asked by a human, and (vi) execute some activities automatically when certain conditions are met. Each working environment may consist of a different set of resources and activities depending on the task to be performed within it. Thus the software development environment as a whole will be a collection of smaller and heterogeneous working environments.\u0000In OPM, process templates are described in a process programming language called Galois [3] which is an extension of C++ [2]. As an example consider the working on bug process illustrated in Figure 1. In the working on bug process, a typical edit-compile-run cycle will be performed in order to fix a bug of given source files. Figure 2 will give a skeleton of the working on bug process in Galois.","PeriodicalId":414925,"journal":{"name":"International Software Process Workshop","volume":"16 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1990-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127211847","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 1

Review of the state-of-the-art (session summary) 最新技术回顾(会议总结)

International Software Process Workshop Pub Date : 1990-10-01 DOI: 10.5555/317498.317687

W. Humphrey

{"title":"Review of the state-of-the-art (session summary)","authors":"W. Humphrey","doi":"10.5555/317498.317687","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5555/317498.317687","url":null,"abstract":"The opening session of the 5th International Software Process Workshop covered a wide range of topics so it is not possible to capture its full scope in this brief summary. This paper briefly outlines the main views expressed by the participants and then provides a precis of the participants' comments. Because of the dynamic nature of those discussions, however, I have taken the liberty of grouping related points for a more coherent presentation. I also take full responsibility for any errors or omissions.\u0000Even though this first session was entitled “state-of-the-art,” there was little discussion of actual process modeling experience. From the many examples given in the proceedings, however, there was considerable evidence of practical experience and the discussions reflected a general consensus that process modeling methods have been found both practical and helpful. While no examples were given of the unsuccessful application of formal methods, there was a strong minority view that such low-technology methods as procedure manuals and software standards were widely used and are often quite effective.\u0000There was also general agreement that tools which include an implicit process were not true process models. To qualify as a process model, the process used by the tool should be explicitly defined. A strong consensus also held that the time had now come to more broadly apply these modeling methods to a range of well-known software process activities. It was felt this would provide useful insights on their development and introduction.\u0000While there was no focused discussion on the objectives of process modeling, the purposes noted fell into three general categories:to provide a precise framework for understanding, experimenting with, and reasoning about the process;\u0000to facilitate process automation;\u0000to provide a basis for process control.\u0000\u0000An important role of process models is improvement of the combined human/technology activities involved in producing software. Because of the dynamic nature of such people intensive work, it was suggested that these models should include the recursive capability to improve themselves.\u0000A subject that was widely discussed and returned to again in subsequent workshop sessions was the special impact of the human element in software process models. While it was agreed that the human element adds considerable complexity, there were widely divergent viewpoints. These ranged from considering human-related issues as outside our area of competence to believing that such issues were central to all process work.\u0000Bill Curtis opened this first session with a discussion of key issues and the following challenge: “How much of actual software development behavior will be affected (by process modeling) and what will be the benefit?” He then divided software process issues into two classes: the control process and the learning process. The former concerns management's need for an orderly framework for evaluating progress while the lat","PeriodicalId":414925,"journal":{"name":"International Software Process Workshop","volume":"19 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1990-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126919262","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0