Hardware Reference
In-Depth Information
analyzed and controlled by using appropriate QATs throughout the development
process. Development teams need appropriate information about QATs to better
understand their impact on quality and to better integrate QATs into process
models. Previous process tailoring approaches do not attempt to systematically
capture and document how QATs can be incorporated into process models. This
study has investigated important characteristics of QATs and has proposed a
framework to capture and present significant QAT information to support QAT
selection and process tailoring.
On the basis of this characterisation, development teams can use the QATF to
help identify important information about QATs and to place QATs into devel-
opment phases. We have used risk management theory as a basis to characterise
QATs according to the means by which they impact potential quality risks. This
has let us develop a framework that addresses a variety product qualities. Al-
though the QATF was motivated and developed using safety techniques, our
initial evaluation has showed that the framework can be used for performance,
and we expect that other product qualities will also be able to be treated within
the framework. This framework has been generated according to our own view,
further theoretical and empirical evaluation is required for this initial framework.
Our future work will develop process tailoring methods to select appropriate
QATs according to the product quality goals in a development project, and to
incorporate those QATs into software development process models. The SPEM
metamodel and EPF Composer will be investigated in terms of their ability to
support the representation of QAT information captured by QATF and also
integration of QATs.
Acknowledgements.
NICTA is funded by the Australian Government as rep-
resented by the Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital
Economy and the Australian Research Council through the ICT Centre of Ex-
cellence program.
References
1. Forrester, E.: A Process Research Framework. The International Process Research
Consortium (IPRC) (2006)
2. Zhu, L., Jeffery, D.R., Staples, M., Huo, M., Tran, T.T.: Effects of Architecture and
Technical Development Process on Micro-process. In: Wang, Q., Pfahl, D., Raffo,
D.M. (eds.) ICSP 2007. LNCS, vol. 4470, pp. 49-60. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)
3. Smith, C.U., Williams, L.G.: Best Practices for Software Performance Engineer-
ing. Technical report, Performance Engineering Services and Software Engineering
Research (2003)
4. Basili, V.R., Rombach, H.D.: Tailoring the Software Process to Project Goals and
Environments. In: International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSP), pp.
345-357 (1987)
5. Bowers, J., May, J., Melander, E., Baarman, M., Ayoob, A.: Tailoring XP for Large
System Mission Critical Software Development. In: Wells, D., Williams, L. (eds.)
XP 2002. LNCS, vol. 2418, pp. 100-111. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)
