Review of Relevant System Development Life Cycles (SDLCs) in Service-Oriented Software Engineering (SoSE)

 

L. Rodríguez-Martínez*¹, M. Mora², F. Álvarez³, L. Garza⁴, H. Durán⁵, J. Muñoz⁶

 

¹ Technological Institute of Aguascalientes, Adolfo López Mateos Avenue, 1801 Aguascalientes, Aguascalientes, México.*lrodriguez@mail.ita.mx.

^{2 4,6} Autonomous University of Aguascalientes, Universidad Avenue, 940 Aguascalientes, Aguascalientes, México.

⁵ Universidad de Guadalajara Periférico Norte, 799 Zapopan, Jalisco, México.

 

Abstract

Service-oriented software engineering (SoSE) is a new paradigm for building software systems, fostered by the availability of a new -but already mature- computing technology based on services. SoSE advances the current object-oriented and the component-based software engineering paradigms. Under that new paradigm, multiple software-system development life cycle (SDLC) methodologies have been proposed; however, none of them have gained a total acceptance as the dominant SDLC in SoSE. On this theoretical and practical situation, we believe that a research is required to reach more standardized and stabilized knowledge about SDLCs in SoSE. Thus, this article reviews nine recent SDLCs proposed for SoSE with the aim to present a descriptive-comparative landscape of a relevant range of SDLCs for SoSE. Such description-comparison is guided by two criteria: (i) the extent of completeness of each SDLC, with respect to the proposed phases, activities and delivered artifacts, and (ii) the extent of the Boehm-Turner's Rigor-Agility balance. Our results suggest that only three of the nine SDLCs studied already provide the best level of completeness and Rigor-Agility. Finally, we consider that the reported descriptive-comparative framework and their findings from each SDLC can be useful also for comparing and elaborating future SDLCs in SoSE.

Keywords: Service-oriented software systems (SoSS), service-oriented software engineering (SoSE), system development life cycle (SDLC), software development methodologies, Boehm-Turner's Rigor-Agility balance level.

 

Resumen

La ingeniería de software orientada a servicios (SoSE - service-oriented software engineering) es un nuevo paradigma para construir sistemas de software que ha florecido por la disponibilidad de una nueva pero madura tecnología computacional basada en servicios. SoSE es un avance sobre los paradigmas de la ingeniería de software orientada a objetos (OOSE - object-oriented software engineering) y basado en componentes (CBSE -component-based software engineering). En SoSE, se han propuesto múltiples metodologías de ciclo de vida de desarrollo de sistemas de software (SDLC - software-system development life cycle), sin que alguna de ellas sea aceptada como SDLC dominante en SoSE. Bajo esta situación, se sugiere investigar con el objetivo de un conocimiento más estandarizado y estabilizado sobre SDLC en SoSE. Este artículo revisa nueve SDLC para SoSE recientes, presentando un panorama descriptivo-comparativo de un rango relevante de ellos. Esta descripción-comparación se guía por dos criterios: (i) el grado de completitud de cada SDLC respecto a sus fases, actividades y artefactos entregables, y (ii) el grado de balance rigor-agility (Boehm-Turner). Los resultados sugieren que tres de los SDLC bajo estudio son los más completos y balanceados. Finalmente, se sugiere la utilidad del framework de descripción-comparación y los hallazgos reportados para la elaboración de algún futuro SDLC para SoSE.

 

DESCARGAR ARTÍCULO EN FORMATO PDF

 

References

[1] Di Nitto E., Hall R.J., Han J., Han Y., Polini A., Sandkuhl K. & Zisman A., Report on the International Workshop on Service Oriented Software Engineering (IW-SOSE06), ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes, Vol. 31 No. 5, 2006, pp. 36.         [ Links ]

[2] Stiller E. & LeBlanc C., Project-based Software Engineering: an object-oriented approach, Addison-Wesley, 2001.         [ Links ]

[3] Kotonya G., Hutchinson J. & Bloin B., A Method for Formulating and Architecting Component and Service-oriented Systems, Computing Department, Lancaster University, LA1 4YR, 2004, pp. 1-23, UK.         [ Links ]

[4] Rodríguez L.C., Mora M. & Alvarez F.J., A Descriptive/Comparative Study of the Evolution of Process Models of Software Development Life Cycles (PM-SDLCs), SIS 07: Simposio de Ingeniería de Software in ENC 2007: Encuentro Internacional de Computación, 2007, pp. 1-6, Morelia, México.         [ Links ]

[5] DeMarco T. & Boehm B., The Agile Methods Fray, IEEE Computer Society, Software Technologies, June, 2002, pp. 90-92.         [ Links ]

[6] Beck K. & Boehm B., Agility through Discipline: A Debate, IEEE Computer Society, June, 2003, pp. 44-46.         [ Links ]

[7] Boehm B., Get Ready for Agile Methods, with Care, IEEE Computer Society, Software Development, January, 2002, pp. 64-69.         [ Links ]

[8] Boehm B. & Turner R. Balancing Agility and Discipline: Evaluating and Integrating Agile and Plan-Driven Methods, Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE'04), 02705257/04, IEEE, 2004, pp. 718-719.         [ Links ]

[9] Avison D. & Fitzgerald G., Where now for development methodologies?, Communications of the ACM, 46 (1), 2003, pp. 78-82.         [ Links ]

[10] Williams L., A Survey of Agile Development Methodologies, North Carolina State University, Computer Science Department, 2004, pp. 209-227.         [ Links ]

[11] Amsden J., Modeling SOA IBM (PARTES 1,2,3,4,5), Level: Introductory, STSM, IBM, 2007.         [ Links ]

[12] Ruokolainen T., Service-Oriented Software Engineering: An Introductory Lecture, Toni.Ruokolainen@cs.Helsinki.FI, 2006.         [ Links ]

[13] Arsanjani J., Hailpern B., Martin J. & Tarr P.L., Web Services: Promises and Compromises, IBM Research Division, Thomas J. Watson Research Center, 2006, pp. 1-18.         [ Links ]

[14] Papazoglou M.P., Traverso P., Schahram D., Leymann F. & Bernd J., Service-Oriented Computing: Research Roadmap, Tilburg University, The Netherlands, e-mail: mikep@uvt.nl., 2006, pp. 1-29.         [ Links ]

[15] Zimmermann O., Krogdahl P. & Gee C., Elements of Service-Oriented Analysis and Design: An interdisciplinary modeling approach for SOA projects, IBM, 2004, pp. 1-17.         [ Links ]

[16] Mora, M., Gelman, O., Frank, M., Cervantes, F. & Forgionne, G., Toward an Interdisciplinary Engineering and Management of Complex IT-intensive Organizational Systems: a Systems View, International Journal of Information Technologies and the Systems Approach, 1(1), 2008, pp.1-24.         [ Links ]

[17] Dumas M., Towards a Semantic Framework for Service Description, Cooperative Information Systems Research Centre, 2000, pp. 1-20, Queensland University of Technology, Australia.         [ Links ]

[18] Rodríguez-Martínez L.C., Mora-Tavarez M. & Macías-Luévano J., La Integración de Servicios Informáticos: Un reto actual para el Cambio de las Organizaciones Modernas, XIV ACACIA, 2010, pp. 1-18, México.         [ Links ]

[19] Mora, M., Gelman, O., O'Connor, R., Alvarez, F. & Macias-Luevano, J., A Conceptual Descriptive-Comparative Study of Models and Standards of Processes in SE, F. Stowell and M. Mora Editors, SwE and IT disciplines using the Theory of Systems, International Journal of Information Technologies and the Systems Approach, 2008, pp. 156-184.         [ Links ]

[20] Korbyn C., Modeling Components and Frameworks with UML. ACM Communications Vol. 43, No. 10, 2000, pp. 31-38.         [ Links ]

[21] Hopkins J., Component Primer, ACM Communications Vol. 43, No. 10, 2000, pp. 27-30.         [ Links ]

[22] Rodríguez L.C., Mora M., O'Connor R., Garza L.A., Álvarez F.J., Durán H.A., Toward a Framework for Comparison System Development Life Cycles (SDLCs) in Service -Oriented Software Engineering (SOSE), GITMA 2009 Conference, June 14-16, 2009, pp.         [ Links ]

[23] Miller J. & Mukerji J., MDA Guide Version 1.0.1, OMG, 2003.         [ Links ]

[24] Rodríguez L.C., Mora M., Alvarez F.J. & Vargas Martín M., Process Models of SDLCs: Comparison and Evolution, M. Rahman Syed and S. Nessa Syed Editors, Handbook of Research con Modern Systems Analysis and Design Technologies and Applications, 2008, pp. 76-89.         [ Links ]

[25] Karastoyanova D., A Methodology for Development of Web Services-based Bussines Processes, Thechnische Universität Darmstadt, 2003, pp. 1-8.         [ Links ]

[26] Ivanyukovich A., Gangadharan G.R., D'Andrea V. & Marchese M., Towards a Service-Oriented Development Methodology. Department of Information and Communication Technology, University of Trento, 2005, pp. 1-10, Italy.         [ Links ]

[27] Kühne S., Thränert M. & Speck A., Towards a methodology for orchestration and validation of cooperative e-business components, Institute of Cybernetics at Tallinn Technical University, ISBN 9985894-89-8, 2005, pp. 29-34.         [ Links ]

[28] Cox D. E. & Kreger H., Management of the service oriented-architecture life cycle, IBM SYSTEMS JOURNAL, VOL 44, NO 4, IBM Corporation, 2005, pp. 709-726.         [ Links ]

[29] Karakostas B., Zorgios Y. & Alevizos C.C., Automatic derivation of BPEL4WS from IDEF0 process models. Software & System Modeling 5(2), 2006, pp. 208-218.         [ Links ]

[30] Papazoglou M.P. & Van Den Heuvel W., Business Process Development Life Cycle Methodology, Communications of the ACM, Vol. 50, No. 10, 2007, pp. 79-85.         [ Links ]

[31] Qing Gu & Lago P., A stakeholder-driven Service Life Cycle Model for SOA, ACM IW-SOSWE'07, 2007, pp. 1-7, Dubrovnik, Croatia.         [ Links ]

[32] Cantor M., Rational Unified Process for Systems Engineering, Rational Brand Services IBM Software Group, 2003.         [ Links ]