Supporting Project Management Through Integrated Management of System and Project Knowledge

• Aurum A, Jefferey R, Wohlin C, Handzic M (eds) (2003) Managing software engineering knowledge. Springer, Berlin

  MATH  Google Scholar 

• Aurum A, Wohlin C, Porter A (2006) Aligning software project decisions: a case study. Int J Softw Eng Knowl Eng 16(6):795–818

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Babar MA, Gorton I (2007) A tool for managing software architecture knowledge. In: SHARK/ADI’07: 2nd workshop on sharing and reusing architectural knowledge - architecture, rationale, and design. IEEE, Minneapolis, MN

  Google Scholar 

• Babar MA, Gorton I, Kitchenham B (2006) A framework for supporting architecture knowledge and rationale management. In: Dutoit AH, McCall R, Mistrik I, Paech B (eds) Rationale management in software engineering. Springer, Berlin

  Google Scholar 

• Babar MA, de Boer RC, Dingsoyr T, Farenhorst R (2007) Architectural knowledge management strategies: approaches in research and industry. In: SHARK/ADI’07: 2nd workshop on sharing and reusing architectural knowledge - architecture, rationale, and design. IEEE, Minneapolis, MN

  Google Scholar 

• Bachmann A, Bird C, Rahman F, Devanbu P, Bernstein A (2010) The missing links: bugs and bug-fix commits. In: FSE: 18th ACM SIGSOFT international symposium on foundations of software engineering, pp 97–106

  Google Scholar 

• Bangcharoensap P, Ihara A, Kamei Y, Matsumoto K (2012) Locating source code to be fixed based on initial bug reports - a case study on the eclipse project. In: International workshop on empirical software engineering in practice, pp 10–15

  Google Scholar 

• Bettenburg N, Just S, Schröter A, Weiss C, Premraj R, Zimmermann T (2008) What makes a good bug report? In: FSE: 16th ACM SIGSOFT international symposium on foundations of software engineering. ACM, New York, NY, pp 308–318

  Google Scholar 

• Bjørnson FO, Dingsøyr T (2008) Knowledge management in software engineering: a systematic review of studied concepts, findings and research methods used. Inf Softw Technol 50:1055–1068

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Burge JE, Brown DC (2004) An integrated approach for software design checking using design rationale. In: First international conference of design computing and cognition, pp 557–576

  Google Scholar 

• Burge JE, Brown DC (2008) Software engineering using RATionale. J Syst Softw 81(3):395–413

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Burge JE, Carroll JM, McCall R, Mistrik I (2008) Rationale-based software engineering. Springer, Berlin

  Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

• Canfora G, Cerulo L (2005) Impact analysis by mining software and change request repositories. In: 11th IEEE international symposium software metrics, Como, pp 21–29

  Google Scholar 

• Canfora G, Cerulo L (2006) Jimpa: an eclipse plug-in for impact analysis. In: CSMR: 10th European conference on software maintenance and reengineering, Bari, pp 340–342

  Google Scholar 

• Canfora G, Casazza G, de Lucia A (2000) A design rationale based environment for cooperative maintenance. Int J Softw Eng Knowl Eng 10(5):627–645

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Capilla R, Nava F, Duenas JC (2007) Modeling and documenting the evolution of architectural design decisions. In: SHARK/ADI’07: 2nd workshop on sharing and reusing architectural knowledge - architecture, rationale, and design. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC

  Google Scholar 

• Capilla R, Zimmermann O, Zdun U, Avgeriou P, Kuester JM (2011) An enhanced architectural knowledge metamodel linking architectural design decisions to other artifacts in the software engineering lifecycle. In: ECSA: 5th european conference on software architecture, Essen, Germany, pp 303–318

  Google Scholar 

• Carroll JM, Rosson MB (1992) Getting around the task-artifact cycle: how to make claims and design by scenario. ACM Trans Inf Syst 10(2):181–212

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Cleland-Huang J, Gotel O, Zisman A (eds) (2012) Software and systems traceability. Springer, New York

  Google Scholar 

• Davies S, Roper M, Wood M (2012) Using bug report similarity to enhance bug localisation. In: WCRE: working conference on reverse engineering, Kingston, pp 125–134

  Google Scholar 

• Delater A, Paech B (2013a) Analyzing the tracing of requirements and source code during software development: a research preview. In: REFSQ’13: 19th international working conference on requirements engineering: foundation for software quality, LNCS, vol 7830. Springer, Berlin, pp 308–314

  Google Scholar 

• Delater A, Paech B (2013b) Tracing requirements and source code during software development: an empirical study. In: ESEM’13: 7th ACM/IEEE international symposium on empirical software engineering and measurement, Baltimore, MD, pp 24–35

  Google Scholar 

• Delater A, Paech B (2013c) UNICASE trace client: a CASE tool integrating requirements engineering, project management and code implementation. In: Workshop Nutzung und Nutzen von Traceability. Lecture notes in informatics, vol 215. GI, pp 459–463

  Google Scholar 

• Delater A, Narayan N, Paech B (2012) Tracing requirements and source code during software development. In: ICSEA’12: 7th international conference of software engineering advances, pp 274–282

  Google Scholar 

• Duncan WR (2013) A guide to the project management body of knowledge (PMBOK^® guide), 5th edn. Project Management Institute (PMI)

  Google Scholar 

• Dutoit AH, Paech B (2001) Rationale management in software engineering. In: Chang SK (ed) Handbook of software engineering and knowledge engineering, vol 1. World Scientific, Singapore

  Google Scholar 

• Dutoit AH, McCall R, Mistrik I, Paech B (eds) (2006) Rationale management in software engineering. Springer, Berlin

  Google Scholar 

• Falessi D, Becker M, Cantone G (2006a) Design decision rationale: experiences and steps ahead towards systematic use. SIGSOFT Softw Eng Notes 31(5)

  Google Scholar 

• Falessi D, Cantone G, Becker M (2006b) Documenting design decision rationale to improve individual and team design decision making. In: ISESE’06: international symposium on empirical software engineering. ACM Press, New York, pp 134–143

  Google Scholar 

• Falessi D, Cantone G, Kruchten P (2008a) Value-based design decision rationale documentation: principles and empirical feasibility study. In: WICSA 08: seventh working IEEE/IFIP conference on software architecture. IEEE, Vancouver, BC, pp 189–198

  Google Scholar 

• Falessi D, Capilla R, Cantone G (2008b) A value-based approach for documenting design decisions rationale. In: SHARK’08: 3rd international workshop on Sharing and reusing architectural knowledge. ACM Press, New York, pp 63–70

  Google Scholar 

• Falessi D, Cantone G, Kazman R, Kruchten P (2011) Decision-making techniques for software architecture design: a comparative survey. ACM Comput Surv 43(4):Article 33

  Google Scholar 

• Gervasi V, Gacitua R, Rouncefield M, Sawyer P, Kof L, Li M, Piwek P, De Roeck A, Willis A, Hui Y, Nuseibeh B (2013) Unpacking tacit knowledge for requirements engineering. In: Maalej W, Thurimella AK (eds) Managing requirements knowledge. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 23–48

  Chapter  Google Scholar 

• Gethers M, Kagdi H, Dit B, Poshyvanyk D (2011) An adaptive approach to impact analysis from change requests to source code. In: ASE: 26th IEEE/ACM international conference on automated software engineering, Lawrence, KS, pp 540–543

  Google Scholar 

• Gethers M, Dit B, Kagdi H, Pashyvanyk D (2012) Integrated impact analysis for managing software changes. In: ICSE: international conference on software engineering. IEEE, Piscataway, NJ, pp 430–440

  Google Scholar 

• Gotel O, Finkelstein A (1994) An analysis of the requirements traceability problem. In: First international conference on requirements engineering, Colorado Springs, CO, pp 94–101

  Google Scholar 

• Hassan, AE (2008) The road ahead for mining software repositories. In: FoSM’08: frontiers of software maintenance, Beijing, pp 48–57

  Google Scholar 

• Helming J, David J, Koegel M, Naughton H (2009a) Integrating system modeling with project management - a case study. In: COMPSAC’09: international computer software and applications conference. IEEE Computer Society, Seattle, WA, pp 571–578

  Google Scholar 

• Helming J, Koegel M, Naughton H (2009b) Towards traceability from project management to system models. In: TEFSE’09: ICSE workshop on traceability in emerging forms of software engineering. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, pp 11–15

  Google Scholar 

• Helming J, Koegel M, Naughton H, David J, Shterev A, Bruegge B (2009c) Traceability-based change awareness. In: MODELS’09: 12th international conference on model driven engineering languages and systems. Springer, Berlin, pp 372–376

  Google Scholar 

• Helming J, Arndt H, Hodaie Z, Koegel M, Narayan N (2010) Automatic assignment of work items. In: ENASE’10: evaluation of novel approaches to software engineering. Communications in computer and information science. Springer, Berlin, pp 236–250

  Google Scholar 

• Jansen A, Bosch J (2005) Software architecture as a set of architectural design decisions. In: WICSA’05: 5th working conference on software architecture. IEEE, Pittsburgh, PA, pp 109–120

  Google Scholar 

• Jansen A, Bosch J, Avgeriou P (2008) Documenting after the fact: recovering architectural design decisions. J Syst Softw 81(4):536–557

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Jansen A, Avgeriou P, van der Ven JS (2009) Enriching software architecture documentation. J Syst Softw 82(8):1232–1248

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Kagdi H, Poshyvanyk D (2009) Who can help me with this change request? In: ICPC: 17th international conference on program comprehension. IEEE, Vancouver, BC, pp 273–277

  Google Scholar 

• Kaushik N, Tahvildari L, Moore M (2011) Reconstructing traceability between bugs and test cases: an experimental study. In: WCRE: 18th working conference on reverse engineering, Limerick, pp 411–414

  Google Scholar 

• Kitchenham B, Charters S (2007) Guidelines for performing systematic literature reviews in software engineering. Technical report EBSE-2007-01. School of Computer Science and Mathematics, Keele University

  Google Scholar 

• Klein G (2008) Naturalistic decision making. J Hum Fact Ergon Soc 50(10):456–460

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Könemann P (2009) Integrating decision management with UML modeling concepts and tools. In: Joint working IEEE/IFIP conference on software architecture & European conference on software architecture. IEEE, Cambridge, pp 297–300

  Google Scholar 

• Kruchten P, Lago P, van Vliet H (2006) Building up and reasoning about architectural knowledge. In: Hofmeister C, Crnkovic I, Reussner R (eds) Quality of software architectures, vol 4214, Lecture notes in computer science. Springer, Berlin, pp 43–58

  Chapter  Google Scholar 

• Lee J (1991) Extending the Potts and Bruns model for recording design rationale. In: ICSE: 13th international conference on software engineering, pp 114–125

  Google Scholar 

• Lindvall M, Rus I (2003) Knowledge management for software organizations. In: Aurum A, Jefferey R, Wohlin C, Handzic M (eds) Managing software engineering knowledge. Springer, Berlin, pp 73–94

  Chapter  Google Scholar 

• Lipshitz R, Klein G, Orasanu J, Salas E (2011) Taking stock of naturalistic decision making. J Behav Decis Mak 14(5):331–352

  Article  Google Scholar 

• López C, Codocedo V, Astudillo H, Cysneiros LM (2012) Bridging the gap between software architecture rationale formalisms and actual architecture documents: an ontology-driven approach. Sci Comput Program 77(1):66–80

  Article  Google Scholar 

• MacLean A, Young RM, Victoria ME, Moran TP (1991) Questions, options, and criteria: elements of design space analysis. Hum Comput Interact 6(3–4):201–250

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Maeder P, Egyed A (2011) Do software engineers benefit from source code navigation with traceability? - an experiment in software change management. In: ASE: 26th IEEE/ACM international conference on automated software engineering, Lawrence, KS, pp 444–447

  Google Scholar 

• Maeder P, Gotel O (2012) Ready-to-use traceability on evolving projects. In: Cleland-Huang J, Gotel O, Zisman A (eds) Software and systems traceability. Springer, New York, pp 173–194

  Chapter  Google Scholar 

• Mentis HM, Bach PM, Hoffman B, Rosson MB, Carroll JM (2009) Development of decision rationale in complex group decision-making. In: CHI: 27th international conference on human factors in computing systems. ACM, New York, pp 1341–1350

  Google Scholar 

• Menzies T, Zimmermann TH (2013) Software analytics: so what? Guest editor introduction, special issue. IEEE Softw 30(4):31–37

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Ngo T, Ruhe G (2005) Decision support in requirements engineering. In: Aurum A, Wohlin C (eds) Engineering and managing software requirements. Springer, Berlin

  Google Scholar 

• Nguyen THD, Adams B, Hassan AE (2010) A case study of bias in bug-fix datasets. In: WCRE: 7th working conference on reverse engineering, Beverly, MA, pp 259–268

  Google Scholar 

• PMI (2013) Software extension to the PMBOK guide, 5th edn. IEEE Computer Society, Project Management Institute (PMI)

  Google Scholar 

• Rockwell J, Grosse IR, Krishnamurty S, Wileden JC (2009) A Decision Support Ontology for collaborative decision making in engineering design. In: International symposium on collaborative technologies and systems. IEEE, Baltimore, MD, pp 1–9

  Google Scholar 

• Saaty T (1990) How to make a decision: the analytic hierarchy process. Eur J Oper Res 48(1):9–26

  Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

• Skerrett I (2011) The eclipse foundation. The eclipse community survey 2011. http://www.eclipse.org/org/press-release/20110610_survey.php

• Smith JL, Bohner SA, McCrickard DS (2005) Project management for the 21st century: supporting collaborative design through risk analysis. ACM Southe Conf 43(2):300–305

  Google Scholar 

• Sureka A, Lal S, Agarwal L (2011) Applying Fellegi-Sunter (FS) model for traceability link recovery between bug databases and version archives. In: APSEC: 18th Asia Pacific software engineering conference, Ho Chi Minh, pp 146–153

  Google Scholar 

• Tang A, Babar MA, Gorton I, Han J (2006) A survey of architecture design rationale. J Syst Softw 79(12):1792–1804

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Tang A, Jin Y, Han J (2007) A rationale-based architecture model for design traceability and reasoning. J Syst Softw 80(6):918–934

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Tang A, Avgeriou P, Jansen A, Capilla R, Babar MA (2010) A comparative study of architecture knowledge management tools. J Syst Softw 83(3):352–370

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Tyree J, Akerman A (2005) Architecture decisions: demystifying architecture. IEEE Softw 22(2):19–27

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Wang W, Burge JE (2010) Using rationale to support pattern-based architectural design. In: SHARK’10: ICSE workshop on sharing and reusing architectural knowledge. ACM Press, New York, pp 1–8

  Google Scholar 

• Yadla S, Hayes JH, Dekhtyar A (2005) Tracing requirements to defect reports: an application of information retrieval techniques. Innov Syst Softw Eng 1:116–124

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Zannier C, Maurer F (2006) Foundations of agile decision making from agile mentors and developers. In: Abrahamsson P, Marchesi M, Succi G (eds) Extreme programming and agile processes in software engineering. Springer, Berlin, pp 11–20

  Chapter  Google Scholar 

• Zannier C, Chiasson M, Maurer F (2007) A model of design decision-making based on empirical results of interviews with software designers. Inf Softw Technol 49(6):637–653

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Zimmermann O, Gschwind T, Küster J, Leymann F, Schuster N (2007) Reusable architectural decision models for enterprise application development. In: Overhage S, Szyperski CA, Reussner R, Stafford JA (eds) Software architectures, components, and applications. Springer, Berlin, pp 15–32

  Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references