Cited By
View all- Kamsu-Foguem BTiako PFotso LFoguem C(2015)Modeling for effective collaboration in telemedicineTelematics and Informatics10.1016/j.tele.2015.03.00932:4(776-786)Online publication date: 1-Nov-2015
Perspectives of delegation in team-based distributed software development over the GENI infrastructure (NIER track)
Pages 796 - 799
Abstract
Team-based distributed software development (TBDSD) is one of the single biggest challenges facing software companies. The need to manage development efforts and resources in different locations increase the complexity and cost of modern day software development. Current software development environments do not provide suitable support to delegate task among teams with appropriate directives. TBDSD is also limited to the current internet capabilities. One of the resulting problems is the difficulty to delegate and control tasks assigned among remote teams. This paper proposes (1) a new framework for delegation in TBDSD, and (2) perspectives for deploying Process-centered Software Engineering Environments (PSEE) over the Global Environment for Network Innovations (GENI) infrastructure. GENI, the 'future Internet' that is taking shape in prototypes across the US, will allow, in the context of our study, to securely access and share software artifacts, resources, and tools as never before seen over the current Internet.
References
[1]
Acuna, S. T., and Juristo, N. 2005. Software Process Modeling. Springer.
[2]
Bauer, T. and Dadam, P. 1997. A Distributed Execution Environment for Large-Scale Workflow Management Systems with Subnets and Server Migration. In Proc. of the Second International Conference on Cooperative Information Systems.
[3]
Ben-Shaul, I. and Kaiser, G. 1998. Federation of Process-Centered Environments: the Oz Experience. Automated Soft. Engineering. 5,1.
[4]
Boehm, B. and Egyed, A. 1998. Software Requirements Negotiation: Some Lessons Learned. In Proc. of the 20th ICSE.
[5]
Burtsev, A., Radhakrishnan, P., Hibler M., Lepreau, J. 2009. Transparent Checkpoints of Closed Distributed Systems in Emulab. In Proc. of the Fourth ACM European Conf. on Computer Systems.
[6]
Chen, X., Morley Mao, Z., Van der Merwe, J. 2009. ShadowNet: A Platform for Rapid and Safe Network Evolution. In Proc. of USENIX Annual Technical Conference (USENIX'09).
[7]
Chng, S. and Padgham, L. 1998. From Roles to Teamwork: A Framework and Architecture. Intl Journal of Applied Artificial Intelligence. 12, 2--3.
[8]
Coleman G. 2008. Investigating Software Process in Practice: A Grounded Theory Perspective. Journal of Systems and Soft. 81, 5.
[9]
Ebert, C. and De Neve, P. 2001. Surviving global software development. IEEE Software. 18, 2.
[10]
Estublier, J., Cunin, P., Belkhatir, N., Amiour, M., and Dami, S. 1998. Architectures for Process Support System Interoperability. In Proc. of the 5th International Conference on Software Process.
[11]
Groenewegen, L., Kampenhout, N. V., de Vink, E. P. 2005. Delegation Modeling with Paradigm. In Proc. 7th Intl. Conf. on Coordination Models and Languages, LNCS 3454, 94--108.
[12]
Hahn, U., Jarke, M., and Rose, T. 1991. Teamwork Support in a Knowledge-based Information Systems Environment. Transactions on Software Engineering. 17, 5, 467--482.
[13]
McKeown, N., T. Anderson, H. Balakrishnan, G. Parulkar, L. Peterson, J. Rexford, S. Shenker, and J. Turner. 2008. OpenFlow: Enabling Innovation in Campus Networks. ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review. 38, 2, 69--74.
[14]
Nierstrasz, O. and Tsichritzis, D. 1995. Object-Oriented Software Composition. Prentice Hall.
[15]
Oberleitner, J. and Gschwind, T. and Jazayeri, M. 2003. The Vienna Component Framework: Enabling Composition Across Component Models. In Proc. of the 25th Intl. Conf. on Software Engineering.
[16]
Peterson, L.; Bavier, A., Fiuczynski, M. E. and Muir, S. 2006. Experiences building PlanetLab. In Proc. of the 7th symposium on Operating systems design and implementation.
[17]
Pham, Q., Reid, J., McCullagh, A., and Ed Dawson, E. 2008. Commitment issues in delegation process. In Proceeding of the sixth Australasian Conference on Information Security.
[18]
Ricci, R., Lepreau, J., Stoller, L., Hibler, M., and Johnson, D. 2008. ProtoGENI: A Network for Next-Generation Internet Research. In Proc. 8th USENIX Symp. on Operating Systems Design and Implementation (OSDI '08).
[19]
Robinson, W. and Volkov, V. 1998. Supporting the Negotiation Life Cycle. Communications of the ACM. 41, 5, 95--102.
[20]
Seattle. 2010. Open peer-to-peer Computing. https://seattle.cs.washington.edu/wiki. Washington University.
[21]
Singh, M. 1996. Distributed Scheduling of Workflow Computations. Technical Report. North Carolina State University.
[22]
Tiako, P. 1998. Modeling the Federation of Process Sensitive Engineering Environments: Basics Concepts and Perspectives. In Proc. 6th Euro. Wokshp on Soft. Process Technology. LNCS 1487.
[23]
Wiredu, G. O. 2006. A Framework for the Analysis of Coordination in Global Software Development. In Proc. of the 2006 ICSE Workshop on Global Software Development for the Practitioner.
Index Terms
- Perspectives of delegation in team-based distributed software development over the GENI infrastructure (NIER track)
Recommendations
A Systematic Literature Review on Global Software Development Life Cycle
Global software development (GSD) has now become a prominent software development paradigm. Software companies are increasingly adopting GSD approaches in order to produce high quality software. GSD's popularity has attracted the researchers to ...
Scrum-based Methodology for Distributed Software Development
ICGSE '11: Proceedings of the 2011 IEEE Sixth International Conference on Global Software EngineeringThere are many companies doing software development in a distributed way nowadays, due to the great benefits that it provides, however, this type of development also leads to multiple complications such as deteriorated communications. Among the most ...
Agile vs. structured distributed software development: A case study
In globally distributed software development, does it matter being agile rather than structured? To answer this question, this paper presents an extensive case study that compares agile (Scrum, XP, etc.) vs. structured (RUP, waterfall) processes to ...
Comments
Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
May 2011
1258 pages
ISBN:9781450304450
DOI:10.1145/1985793
- General Chair:
- Richard N. Taylor,
- Program Chairs:
- Harald Gall,
- Nenad Medvidović
Copyright © 2011 ACM.
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]
Sponsors
Publisher
Association for Computing Machinery
New York, NY, United States
Publication History
Published: 21 May 2011
Check for updates
Author Tags
Qualifiers
- Research-article
Conference
ICSE11
Sponsor:
Acceptance Rates
Overall Acceptance Rate 276 of 1,856 submissions, 15%
Upcoming Conference
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- View Citations1Total Citations
- 193Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)1
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 20 Feb 2025
Other Metrics
Citations
Cited By
View all- Kamsu-Foguem BTiako PFotso LFoguem C(2015)Modeling for effective collaboration in telemedicineTelematics and Informatics10.1016/j.tele.2015.03.00932:4(776-786)Online publication date: 1-Nov-2015
View Options
Login options
Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.
Sign in