The mission of the STARS program is to stimulate and accelerate the transition into practice of productivity-and quaiity-enhancing benefits from emerging software pro ce ss and reuse technologies.Process technology development and transfer activities in STARS are organized to present a conceptual model [see Figure 1] of process insertion, usage, and improvement that will achieve process-driven development in organizations developing criticai software systems. This model addnmes the interactions between major participants in processprocess definers, process users, process improvers, and those responsible for institutionaiizing effective processes. Key constituents of the model (and hence, activities in STARS) are a process asset library, process definition technology, process enactment (use) support, process measurement technology, and process evolution concepts. The SEI'S process concepts provide the context and industry expectations for process technology which STARS is fostering, and the SEI leads the joint STARS/SEI process Asset Library activity.STARS emphasizes automated support for process technology (meaning tools supporting the emerging role of process engineer) in evolving, commercially supported software engineering environments. Because Ada systems development is the primary target of STARS technology, STARS is sponsoring formaiizations of Ada process models and reuse processes that take advantage of Ada. Figure 1. Process-Driven Development Conceptual Model 1

No abstract

No abstract

DoD requirements to use DoD's new programming language Ada by the mid-1980's will create challenges to developers of military software in a) retraining large populations of experienced software practitioners to use Ada and b) achieving potential productivity and quality gains cited as Ada's life-cycle objectives. Many organizations are planning to use Ada as a software design language to achieve early experience and results in both the training and quality-improvement areas. A common approach in using Ada for software design is to use full-syntax Ada to represent design, although most Ada design methods omit low-level features of Ada from the set of constructs used in design; some advocates are using Ada as a vehicle to teach a single, favored methodology for software development. This paper offers an alternative approach, in which syntax is simplified, but the design language does, in a methodology-independent manner, include all the features which support important early design activities. The rationale for the simpler design language is that, with no net sacrifice of software engineering aids, it is a more palatable evolution from prevailing design practices in large software organizations.

Software Methods and Tools tonyw @ methods-tools.com 1. A B S T R A C T 20 years ago, in 1979, a l a n d m a r k c o m m u n i t y . wide process was l a u n c h e d to establish notional requirements for integrated software engineering environments. The resulting " S t o n e m a n " d o c u m e n t was published in F e b r u a r y 1980. Bred of the software engineering research c o m m u n i t y and catalyzed by the G o v e r n m e n t A d a sponsor, this "integrated e n v i r o n m e n t m o v e m e n t " b r a n c h e d out and was e m b r a c e d widely in the software engineering c o m m u n i t y in the 1980's as a needed, achievable, centrist a p p r o a c h to accelerate the benefits of disciplined software engineering into m a i n s t r e a m practice. The CASE tool i n d u s t r y b l o o m e d as p r o d u c t s integrating lifecycle activities and artifacts emerged, and research evolved to e n v i r o n m e n t s integrated by s u p p o r t for emerging, m a t u r i n g notions of software processes. Yet, at the end of the 1990's, this m o v e m e n t appears to have virtually died, and m o r e and m o r e p r o d u c t i o n software organizations are instead (or again) using old-fashioned stand-alone d e v e l o p m e n t tools a n d struggling to m a t c h up tools a n d their outputs a n d inputs to do software engineering. The p u r p o s e of this panel is to explore the reasons why the integrated e n v i r o n m e n t m o v e m e n t has retreated, w h e t h e r the recent tools and methods are or are not achieving the goals of integrated environments, w h e t h e r those goals have been superceded by other goals better served without integrated environments, a n d w h a t these examinations indicate about f u t u r e r e q u i r e m e n t s and research needs.