Abstract
Among the approaches to develop Software Product Lines (SPL), the extractive approach is adopted when the company has a set of similar systems that are analyzed to extract, categorize, and group their features throughout the SPL reengineering process. However, SPL reengineering scenarios differ due to different variables, such as the experience of the developers and product portfolios. Due to this diversity of options, rigorous planning of the reengineering process is critical to perform SPL reengineering. To create a planning framework to allow customization, we sought in the literature and analyzed SPL reengineering processes. We defined the Prepare, Assemble, and Execute Framework for SPL Reengineering (PAxSPL). PAxSPL aids the SPL reengineering planning by providing flexibility concerning artifacts, strategies, and techniques used for feature retrieval. This flexibility is given by allowing the choice and combination of different techniques for feature retrieval based on company related information. We conducted a case study to collect exploratory evidence about PAxSPL application into ten different products, generated from an organization’s real development environment. The results indicated that our proposal helps in the assembly of a feature retrieval process according to user’s needs. Furthermore, we collected evidence about the reusability of SPL assets when re-executing the reengineering process in a similar scenario.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
In this chapter, we consider an organizational scenario to be “a certain group of engineers, having a set of system variants, knowing a specific set of techniques for analyzing features from a determined set of artifacts”.
- 2.
PAxSPL is presented by using the Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN), all the figures presented in this section related with PAxSPL activities were created using BPMN 2.0 https://www.omg.org/spec/BPMN/2.0/.
- 3.
- 4.
Dynamic analysis techniques are not being considered in this version of PAxSPL and will be included in future work.
- 5.
All artifacts are available at our case study repository: https://github.com/HestiaProject/PAxSPL/tree/master/process/case%20study.
- 6.
References
Acher, M., Cleve, A., Collet, P., Merle, P., Duchien, L., Lahire, P.: Extraction and evolution of architectural variability models in plugin-based systems. Software & Systems Modeling 13(4), 1367–1394 (2013)
Acher, M., Cleve, A., Perrouin, G., Heymans, P., Vanbeneden, C., Collet, P., Lahire, P.: On extracting feature models from product descriptions. In: 6th International Workshop on Variability Modeling of Software-Intensive Systems, pp. 45–54. ACM (2012)
AL-Msie’deen, R., Seriai, A., Huchard, M., Urtado, C., Vauttier, S., Salman, H.E.: Feature location in a collection of software product variants using formal concept analysis. In: J. Favaro, M. Morisio (eds.) Safe and Secure Software Reuse, pp. 302–307. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg (2013)
Alsawalqah, H.I., Kang, S., Lee, J.: A method to optimize the scope of a software product platform based on end-user features. Journal of Systems and Software 98, 79–106 (2014)
Alves, V., Schwanninger, C., Barbosa, L., Rashid, A., Sawyer, P., Rayson, P., Pohl, C., Rummler, A.: An exploratory study of information retrieval techniques in domain analysis. In: 2008 12th International Software Product Line Conference, pp. 67–76 (2008)
Assunção, W., Lopez-Herrejon, R., Linsbauer, L., Vergilio, S., Egyed, A.: Reengineering legacy applications into software product lines: a systematic mapping. Empirical Software Engineering pp. 1–45 (2017)
Bagheri, E., Ensan, F., Gasevic, D.: Decision support for the software product line domain engineering lifecycle. Automated Software Engineering 19(3), 335–377 (2012)
Bartholdt, J., Becker, D.: Scope extension of an existing product line. In: 16th International Software Product Line Conference - Volume 1, SPLC ’12, pp. 275–282. ACM, New York, NY, USA (2012)
Bécan, G., Acher, M., Baudry, B., Nasr, S.: Breathing ontological knowledge into feature model management. Tech. rep., IRISA - Institut de Recherche en Informatique et Systèmes Aléatoires, Inria Rennes – Bretagne Atlantique (2013)
Bosch, J.: The challenges of broadening the scope of software product families. Communications of the ACM 49(12), 41–44 (2006)
Bosch, J.: From software product lines to software ecosystems. In: Proceedings of the 13th International Software Product Line Conference, SPLC ’09, p. 111–119. Carnegie Mellon University, USA (2009)
Chen, K., Zhang, W., Zhao, H., Mei, H.: An approach to constructing feature models based on requirements clustering. In: Requirements Engineering, 2005. Proceedings. 13th IEEE International Conference on, pp. 31–40. IEEE (2005)
Cruz, J., Neto, P.S., Britto, R., Rabelo, R., Ayala, W., Soares, T., Mota, M.: Toward a hybrid approach to generate software product line portfolios. In: IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation, pp. 2229–2236 (2013)
Damaševičius, R., Paškevičius, P., Karčiauskas, E., Marcinkevičius, R.: Automatic extraction of features and generation of feature models from java programs. Information Technology And Control 41(4), 376–384 (2012)
deBaud, J.., Schmid, K.: A systematic approach to derive the scope of software product lines. In: Proceedings of the 1999 International Conference on Software Engineering (IEEE Cat. No.99CB37002), 99CB37002, pp. 34–43 (1999)
Dhungana, D., Seichter, D., Botterweck, G., Rabiser, R., Grünbacher, P., Benavides, D., Galindo, J.A.: Integrating heterogeneous variability modeling approaches with invar. In: Proceedings of the Seventh International Workshop on Variability Modelling of Software-Intensive Systems, VaMoS ’13. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA (2013)
Dumais, S.: Latent semantic analysis. Annual review of information science and technology 38(1), 188–230 (2004)
Eisenbarth, T., Koschke, R., Simon, D.: Derivation of feature component maps by means of concept analysis. In: Software Maintenance and Reengineering, 2001. Fifth European Conference on, pp. 176–179. IEEE (2001)
El-Sharkawy, S., Yamagishi-Eichler, N., Schmid, K.: Metrics for analyzing variability and its implementation in software product lines: A systematic literature review. Information and Software Technology 106, 1–30 (2019)
Eyal-Salman, H., Seriai, D., Dony, C.: Identifying traceability links between product variants and their features. In: 1st International workshop on Reverse Variability Engineering, pp. 17–22 (2013)
Eyal-Salman, H., Seriai, D., Dony, C.: Feature location in a collection of product variants: Combining information retrieval and hierarchical clustering. In: Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering, pp. 426–430 (2014)
Ferrari, A., Spagnolo, G.O., Dell’Orletta, F.: Mining commonalities and variabilities from natural language documents. In: 17th International Software Product Line Conference, pp. 116–120. ACM (2013)
Fischer, S., Linsbauer, L., Lopez-Herrejon, R.E., Egyed, A.: Enhancing clone-and-own with systematic reuse for developing software variants. In: Software Maintenance and Evolution (ICSME), 2014 IEEE International Conference on, pp. 391–400. IEEE (2014)
Hamza, H.S., Martinez, J., Alonso, C.: Introducing product line architectures in the erp industry: Challenges and lessons learned. In: SPLC Workshops, pp. 263–266 (2010)
Hubaux, A., Heymans, P., Benavides, D.: Variability modeling challenges from the trenches of an open source product line re-engineering project. In: 12th International Software Product Line Conference, pp. 55–64. IEEE (2008)
Jain, A.K., Dubes, R.C.: Algorithms for clustering data. Prentice-Hall, Inc. (1988)
Kang, K., Cohen, S., Hess, J.A., Novak, W., Peterson, A.: Feature-oriented domain analysis (FODA) feasibility study. Tech. rep., DTIC Document (1990)
Kang, K., Kim, M., Lee, J., Kim, B.: Feature-oriented re-engineering of legacy systems into product line assets–a case study. In: International Conference on Software Product Lines, pp. 45–56. Springer (2005)
Kelly, M., Alexander, J., Adams, B., Hassan, A.: Recovering a balanced overview of topics in a software domain. In: Source Code Analysis and Manipulation (SCAM), 2011 11th IEEE International Working Conference on, pp. 135–144. IEEE (2011)
Klatt, B., Krogmann, K., Seidl, C.: Program dependency analysis for consolidating customized product copies. In: IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance and Evolution, pp. 496–500. IEEE (2014)
Krueger, C.: Easing the transition to software mass customization. In: International Workshop on Software Product-Family Engineering, pp. 282–293. Springer (2001)
Krüger, J., Mahmood, W., Berger, T.: Promote-pl: A round-trip engineering process model for adopting and evolving product lines. In: Proceedings of the 24th ACM Conference on Systems and Software Product Line: Volume A - Volume A, SPLC ’20. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA (2020)
Kulesza, U., Alves, V., Garcia, A., Neto, A., Cirilo, E., De Lucena, C., Borba, P.: Mapping features to aspects: A model-based generative approach. In: Early Aspects Workshop, pp. 155–174. Springer (2007)
Laguna, M.A., Crespo, Y.: A systematic mapping study on software product line evolution: From legacy system reengineering to product line refactoring. Science of Computer Programming 78(8), 1010–1034 (2013)
Leitner, A., Kreiner, C.: Managing erp configuration variants: An experience report. In: Proceedings of the 2010 Workshop on Knowledge-Oriented Product Line Engineering, KOPLE ’10. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA (2010)
Marchezan, L., Carbonell, J., Rodrigues, E., Bernardino, M., Basso, F.P., Assunção, W.K.G.: Enhancing the feature retrieval process with scoping and tool support: Paxspl_v2. In: Proceedings of the 24th ACM International Systems and Software Product Line Conference - Volume B, SPLC ’20, p. 29–36. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA (2020)
Marchezan, L., Rodrigues, E., Bernardino, M., Basso, F.P.: PAxSPL: A feature retrieval process for software product line reengineering. Software: Practice and Experience 49(8), 1278–1306 (2019)
Marchezan, L., Rodrigues, E., Bernardino, M., Basso, F.P.: PAxSPL: A Feature Retrieval Process for SPL Reengineering. In: Proceedings of the 24th ACM Conference on Systems and Software Product Line: Volume A - Volume A, SPLC ’20. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA (2020)
Martinez, J., Assunção, W.K.G., Ziadi, T.: ESPLA: A Catalog of Extractive SPL Adoption Case Studies. In: Proceedings of the 21st International Systems and Software Product Line Conference - Volume B, SPLC ’17, pp. 38–41. ACM, New York, NY, USA (2017)
Martinez, J., Ziadi, T., Bissyandé, T., Klein, J., Le Traon, Y.: Bottom-up adoption of software product lines: a generic and extensible approach. In: Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Software Product Line, pp. 101–110. ACM (2015)
Martinez, J., Ziadi, T., Klein, J., Le Traon, Y.: Identifying and visualising commonality and variability in model variants. In: European Conference on Modelling Foundations and Applications, pp. 117–131. Springer (2014)
Mazo, R., Assar, S., Salinesi, C., Ben Hassen, N.: Using software product line to improve ERP engineering : literature review and analysis. Latin-American Journal of Computing (LAJC) 1(1), . (2014). URL https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-02397633
Muller, J.: Value-based portfolio optimization for software product lines. In: 15th International Software Product Line Conference, pp. 15–24 (2011)
Nöbauer, M., Seyff, N., Dhungana, D., Stoiber, R.: Managing variability of ERP ecosystems: Research issues and solution ideas from microsoft dynamics ax. In: Proceedings of the Sixth International Workshop on Variability Modeling of Software-Intensive Systems, VaMoS ’12, p. 21–26. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA (2012)
Nöbauer, M., Seyff, N., Groher, I.: Similarity analysis within product line scoping: An evaluation of a semi-automatic approach. In: International Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering, pp. 165–179. Springer (2014)
Noor, M.A., Grünbacher, P., Hoyer, C.: A collaborative method for reuse potential assessment in reengineering-based product line adoption. In: Balancing Agility and Formalism in Software Engineering, pp. 69–83. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg (2008)
Rabiser, R., Wolfinger, R., Grünbacher, P.: Three-level customization of software products using a product line approach. In: 2009 42nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, pp. 1–10 (2009)
Runeson, P., Host, M., Rainer, A., Regnell, B.: Case study research in software engineering: Guidelines and examples. John Wiley & Sons (2012)
Schmid, K.: A comprehensive product line scoping approach and its validation. In: Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Software Engineering, ICSE ’02, pp. 593–603. ACM, New York, NY, USA (2002)
Stumme, G.: Formal concept analysis. In: Handbook on ontologies, pp. 177–199. Springer (2009)
Van der Linden, F., Schmid, K., Rommes, E.: Software product lines in action: the best industrial practice in product line engineering, 2007th edn. Springer Science & Business Media (2007)
Weston, N., Chitchyan, R., Rashid, A.: A framework for constructing semantically composable feature models from natural language requirements. In: 13th International Software Product Line Conference, pp. 211–220. Carnegie Mellon University (2009)
Wolfinger, R., Reiter, S., Dhungana, D., Grünbacher, P., Prähofer, H.: Supporting runtime system adaptation through product line engineering and plug-in techniques. In: Seventh International Conference on Composition-Based Software Systems (ICCBSS 2008), pp. 21–30 (2008)
Xue, Y., Xing, Z., Jarzabek, S.: Feature location in a collection of product variants. In: Reverse Engineering (WCRE), 2012 19th Working Conference on, pp. 145–154. IEEE (2012)
Yang, Y., Peng, X., Zhao, W.: Domain feature model recovery from multiple applications using data access semantics and formal concept analysis. In: Reverse Engineering, 2009. WCRE’09. 16th Working Conference on, pp. 215–224. IEEE (2009)
Acknowledgements
This work was partially supported by the Carlos Chagas Filho Foundation for Supporting Research in the State of Rio de Janeiro (FAPERJ), under the PDR-10 program, grant 202073/2020. This work was partially supported by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) grant RGPIN-2017-05421.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding authors
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Appendix
Appendix
13.1.1 Survey 1 Questions: Participants Information
-
1.
How many times have you participated in a case study?
-
2.
How many times have you performed a SPL re-engineering process before?
-
3.
Regarding your technical knowledge, please check the following options: ()SPL () Re-engineering () SPL Re-engineering () Feature Model () Feature Diagrams ()Feature Retrieval Techniques
-
4.
How is the variability of products being performed in this organization?
13.1.2 Survey 2 Questions: Answered After Phase 1
-
1.
Describe any difficulty that you may had during PAxSPL execution.
-
2.
How helpful were PAxSPL’s guidelines? Not Much Helpful 1–5 Very Helpful
-
3.
In which activities did you spend more time during PAxSPL execution?
-
4.
Which artifacts were more used during the reengineering?
-
5.
What artifacts were more important during PAxSPL execution?
-
6.
What changes would you recommend for PAxSPL?
13.1.3 Survey 3 Questions: Answered After Phase 2
-
1.
What were the main difficulties to re-apply PAxSPL?
-
2.
What were the main benefits to re-apply PAxSPL?
-
3.
In which activities did you spend more time during PAxSPL re-execution?
-
4.
How many artifacts from the first execution the team could reuse?
-
5.
How many artifacts from the first execution the team could reuse without modification?
-
6.
How helpful were PAxSPL’s guidelines? Not Much Helpful 1–5 Very Helpful
-
7.
What artifacts were more important during PAxSPL re-execution?
-
8.
What changes would you recommend for PAxSPL?
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2023 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Marchezan, L., Rodrigues, E., Carbonell, J., Bernardino, M., Basso, F.P., Assunção, W.K.G. (2023). PAxSPL: A Framework for Aiding SPL Reengineering Planning. In: Lopez-Herrejon, R.E., Martinez, J., Guez Assunção, W.K., Ziadi, T., Acher, M., Vergilio, S. (eds) Handbook of Re-Engineering Software Intensive Systems into Software Product Lines. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-11686-5_13
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-11686-5_13
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-11685-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-11686-5
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)