Using variability modeling principles to capture architectural knowledge

Abstract

In the field of software architectures, there is an emerging awareness of the importance of architectural decisions. In this view, the architecting process is explained as a decision process, while the design and eventually the software system are seen as the result of this decision process. However, the effects of different alternatives on the quality of the system often remain implicit. In the field of software product families, the same issues arise when configuring products. We propose to use the proven expertise from COVAMOF, a framework for managing variability, to solve the issues that arise when relating quality attributes to architectural decisions.

Representing Variability in Software Architecture: A Systematic Literature Review

“…(Thiel & Hein, 2002b) (Moon, Chae, & Yeom, 2006) (Mikyeong, Heung Seok, Taewoo, & Keunhyuk, 2007) (Dobrica & Niemelä, 2008) (López, Casallas, & Hoek, 2009) (Helleboogh et al, 2009 Other (CVL, LISA etc.) 20 33% (Thiel & Hein, 2002a) (Savolainen, Oliver, Mannion, & Hailang, 2005) (Ortiz, Pastor, Alonso, Losilla, & de Jódar, 2005) (Eklund, Askerdal, Granholm, Alminger, & Axelsson, 2005) (Andersson & Bosch, 2005) (Sinnema, Ven, & Deelstra, 2006) (Satyananda, Danhyung, & Sungwon, 2007) (Dhungana, Neumayer, Grünbacher, & Rabiser, 2008) (Kakarontzas, Stamelos, & Katsaros, 2008) (López et al, 2009) (Mann & Rock, 2009) (Brito et al, 2009 23% (14 papers) of the selected primary studies described how to represent variability using an ADL, with a number of different ADLs adopted. The ADLs used for addressing variability were:…”

“…Other ways that were identified to capture variability in the software architecture are: CVL (Common Variability Language) in (Pascual et al, 2013); LISA (Language for Integrated Software Architecture) in ; formal modelling languages/framework (e.g. (Sinnema et al, 2006) (Satyananda, Danhyung, & Sungwon, 2007) (Hwi et al, 2013)) and modelling tools (e.g. (Dhungana et al, 2008) (Mann & Rock, 2009) (Lytra et al, 2014) (Smiley et al, 2014)), and; formal/informal textual and visual descriptions such as spreadsheets and process diagrams (e.g.…”