Browsing by Subject "Software process"
Now showing 1 - 6 of 6
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item Open Access Catching up with method and process practice: an industry-informed baseline for researchers(Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc., 2019) Klünder, J.; Hebig, R.; Tell, P.; Kuhrmann, M.; Nakatumba-Nabende, J.; Heldal, R.; Krusche, S.; Fazal-Baqaie, M.; Felderer, M.; Bocco, M. F. G.; Küpper, S.; Licorish, S. A.; Lopez, G.; McCaffery, F.; Top, Ö. Ö.; Prause, C. R.; Prikladnicki, R.; Tüzün, Eray; Pfahl, D.; Schneider, K.; MacDonell, S. G.Software development methods are usually not applied by the book. Companies are under pressure to continuously deploy software products that meet market needs and stakeholders' requests. To implement efficient and effective development processes, companies utilize multiple frameworks, methods and practices, and combine these into hybrid methods. A common combination contains a rich management framework to organize and steer projects complemented with a number of smaller practices providing the development teams with tools to complete their tasks. In this paper, based on 732 data points collected through an international survey, we study the software development process use in practice. Our results show that 76.8% of the companies implement hybrid methods. Company size as well as the strategy in devising and evolving hybrid methods affect the suitability of the chosen process to reach company or project goals. Our findings show that companies that combine planned improvement programs with process evolution can increase their process' suitability by up to 5%.Item Open Access Editorial: Best papers of the 14th international conference on software and system processes (ICSSP 2020) and 15th international conference on global software engineering (ICGSE 2020)(John Wiley and Sons Ltd, 2023-01-30) Steinmacher, I.; Clarke, P.; Tüzün, Eray; Britto, R.Today's software industry is global, virtual, and depending more than ever on strong and reliable processes. Stakeholders and infrastructure are distributed across the globe, posing challenges that go beyond those with co-located teams and servers. Software Engineering continues to be a complex undertaking, with projects challenged to meet expectations, especially regarding costs. We know that Software Engineering is an ever-changing discipline, with the result that firms and their employees must regularly embrace new methods, tools, technologies, and processes. In 2020, the International Conference on Global Software Engineering (ICGSE) and the International Conference on Systems and Software Processes (ICSSP) joined forces aiming to create a holistic understanding of the software landscape both from the perspective of human and infrastructure distribution and also the processes to support software development. Unfortunately, these challenges have become even more personal to many more in 2020 due to the disruption introduced by the COVID-19 pandemic, which forced both conferences to be held virtually. As an outcome of the joint event, we selected a set of the best papers from the two conferences, which were invited to submit extended versions to this Special Issue in the Journal of Software: Maintenance and Evolution. Dedicated committees were established to identify the best papers. Eight papers were invited and ultimately, seven of these invited papers have made it into this Special Issue. © 2023 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.Item Open Access Editorial: Machine learning, software process, and global software engineering(John Wiley and Sons Ltd, 2023-01-30) Steinmacher, I.; Clarke, P.; Tüzün, Eray; Britto, R.On June 26–28, 2020, the International Conference on Software and Systems Processes (ICSSP 2020) and the International Conference on Global Software Engineering (ICGSE 2020) were held in virtual settings during the first year of the COVID pandemic. Several submissions to the joint event have been selected for inclusion in this special issue, focusing on impactful and timely contributions to machine learning (ML). At present, many in our field are enthusiastic about the potential of ML, yet some risks should not be casually overlooked or summarily dismissed. Each ML implementation is subtly different from any other implementation, and the risk profile varies greatly based on the approach adopted and the implementation context. The ICSSP/ICGSE 2020 Program Committees have encouraged submissions that explore the risks and benefits associated with ML so that the important discussion regarding ML efficacy and advocacy can be further elaborated. Four contributions have been included in this special issue. © 2023 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.Item Open Access Modeling software product line engineering with essence frame(Gazi Üniversitesi Bilişim Enstitüsü, 2018) Tüzün, Eray; Giray, G.; Tekinerdoğan, B.; Macit, Y.Although several software product line engineering (SPLE) methods have been described in the literature, adopting these methods in practice is often not straightforward. Thorough understanding of the methods and their artefacts is necessary to apply the methods in a proper manner, and likewise realize the expected goals of SPLE. Recently the Essence framework has been proposed to model the essential elements of a method and to support the modeling of a broad set of software development methods including plan-driven methods and agile methods. So far, the Essence framework has been applied to single system development methods and not yet for SPLE methods. To enhance the understanding of SPLE methods and support a vision for tailoring SPLE methods, we provide a mapping of an SPLE method to the Essence framework. We present experiences about modeling an SPLE method using the Essence framework within the industrial context of Havelsan.Item Open Access Towards unified software project monitoring for organizations using hybrid processes and tools(Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc., 2019) Tüzün, Eray; Üsfekes, Ç.; Macit, Y.; Giray, G.Large-scale software development organizations generally carry out multiple software development projects simultaneously. Teams use various software development processes and tools to implement these projects. In this context, the main challenges of the practitioners are (1) keeping track of the status of a single project where hybrid set of tools exist for different software life cycle activities (2) effectively monitoring a consolidated status of multiple projects that use hybrid processes and tools. To address these challenges, it is vital to have a unified view of these projects independent from these hybrid processes and tools. To this end, we report on our preliminary experiences on the development of a unified project monitoring solution and a corresponding tool support based on the Essence framework's language and kernel. Our solution provides an up-to-date and unified view of projects by collecting data from various tools automatically as well as allowing manual data entry.Item Open Access What makes agile software development agile(IEEE, 2021-07-26) Kuhrmann, M.; Tell, P.; Hebig, R.; Klunder, J. A-C; Munch, J.; Linssen, O.; Pfahl, D.; Felderer, M.; Prause, C.; Macdonell, S.; Nakatumba-Nabende, J.; Raffo, D.; Beecham, S.; Tüzün, Eray; Lopez, G.; Paez, N.; Fontdevila, D.; Licorish, S.; Kupper, S.; Ruhe, G.; Knauss, E.; Özcan-Top, O.; Clarke, P.; Mc Caffery, F. H.; Genero, M.; Vizcaino, A.; Piattini, M.; Kalinowski, M.; Conte, T.; Prikladnicki, R.; Krusche, S.; Coşkunçay, A.; Scott, E.; Calefato, F.; Pimonova, S.; Pfeiffer, R-H; Schultz, U. P.; Heldal, R.; Fazal-Baqaie, M.; Anslow, C.; Nayebi, M.; Schneider, K.; Sauer, S.; Winkler, D.; Biffl, S.; Bastarrica, C.; Richardson, I.Together with many success stories, promises such as the increase in production speed and the improvement in stakeholders' collaboration have contributed to making agile a transformation in the software industry in which many companies want to take part. However, driven either by a natural and expected evolution or by contextual factors that challenge the adoption of agile methods as prescribed by their creator(s), software processes in practice mutate into hybrids over time. Are these still agile In this article, we investigate the question: what makes a software development method agile We present an empirical study grounded in a large-scale international survey that aims to identify software development methods and practices that improve or tame agility. Based on 556 data points, we analyze the perceived degree of agility in the implementation of standard project disciplines and its relation to used development methods and practices. Our findings suggest that only a small number of participants operate their projects in a purely traditional or agile manner (under 15%). That said, most project disciplines and most practices show a clear trend towards increasing degrees of agility. Compared to the methods used to develop software, the selection of practices has a stronger effect on the degree of agility of a given discipline. Finally, there are no methods or practices that explicitly guarantee or prevent agility. We conclude that agility cannot be defined solely at the process level. Additional factors need to be taken into account when trying to implement or improve agility in a software company. Finally, we discuss the field of software process-related research in the light of our findings and present a roadmap for future research.