SPM All Units
SPM All Units
SPM All Units
Conventional Software Management: The waterfall model, conventional software Management performance.
Evolution of Software Economics: Software Economics, pragmatic software cost estimation
1. Conventional software management
Conventional software management practices are sound in theory, but practice is still tied to archaic (outdated)
technology and techniques.
Conventional software economics provides a benchmark of performance for conventional software manage-
ment principles.
The best thing about software is its flexibility: It can be programmed to do almost anything.
The worst thing about software is also its flexibility: The "almost anything" characteristic has made it difficult
to plan, monitors, and control software development.
Three important analyses of the state of the software engineering industry are
1. Software development is still highly unpredictable. Only about 10% of software projects are
delivered successfully within initial budget and schedule estimates.
2. Management discipline is more of a discriminator in success or failure than are technology advances.
3. The level of software scrap and rework is indicative of an immature process.
All three analyses reached the same general conclusion: The success rate for software projects is very low.
The three analyses provide a good introduction to the magnitude of the software problem and the current
norms for conventional software management performance.
Analysis
Design
Coding
Testing
Operation
3. The basic framework described in the waterfall model is risky and invites failure. The testing phase
that occurs at the end of the development cycle is the first event for which timing, storage,
input/output transfers, etc., are experienced as distinguished from analyzed. The resulting design
changes are likely to be so disruptive that the software requirements upon which the design is based
are likely violated. Either the requirements must be modified or a substantial design change is
warranted.
1. Program design comes first. Insert a preliminary program design phase between the software
requirements generation phase and the analysis phase. By this technique, the program designer
assures that the software will not fail because of storage, timing, and data flux (continuous
change). As analysis proceeds in the succeeding phase, the program designer must impose on the
analyst the storage, timing, and operational constraints in such a way that he senses the consequences.
If the total resources to be applied are insufficient or if the embryonic(in an early stage of
development) operational design is wrong, it will be recognized at this early stage and the iteration
with requirements and preliminary design can be redone before final design, coding, and test
commences. How is this program design procedure implemented?
2. Document the design. The amount of documentation required on most software programs is quite a lot,
certainly much more than most programmers, analysts, or program designers are willing to do if left to their
own devices. Why do we need so much documentation? (1) Each designer must communicate with interfacing
designers, managers, and possibly customers. (2) During early phases, the documentation is the design. (3) The
real monetary value of documentation is to support later modifications by a separate test team, a separate
maintenance team, and operations personnel who are not software literate.
3. Do it twice. If a computer program is being developed for the first time, arrange matters so that the version
finally delivered to the customer for operational deployment is actually the second version insofar as critical
design/operations are concerned. Note that this is simply the entire process done in miniature, to a time scale
that is relatively small with respect to the overall effort. In the first version, the team must have a special
broad competence where they can quickly sense trouble spots in the design, model them, model alternatives,
forget the straightforward aspects of the design that aren't worth studying at this early point, and, finally,
arrive at an error-free program.
4. Plan, control, and monitor testing. Without question, the biggest user of project resources-manpower,
computer time, and/or management judgment-is the test phase. This is the phase of greatest risk in terms of
cost and schedule. It occurs at the latest point in the schedule, when backup alternatives are least available, if
at all. The previous three recommendations were all aimed at uncovering and solving problems before
entering the test phase. However, even after doing these things, there is still a test phase and there are still
important things to be done, including: (1) employ a team of test specialists who were not responsible for the
original design; (2) employ visual inspections to spot the obvious errors like dropped minus signs, missing
factors of two, jumps to wrong addresses (do not use the computer to detect this kind of thing, it is too
expensive); (3) test every logic path; (4) employ the final checkout on the target computer.
5. Involve the customer. It is important to involve the customer in a formal way so that he has committed
himself at earlier points before final delivery. There are three points following requirements definition where
the insight, judgment, and commitment of the customer can bolster the development effort. These include a
"preliminary software review" following the preliminary program design step, a sequence of "critical software
design reviews" during program design, and a "final software acceptance review".
1.1.2 IN PRACTICE
Some software projects still practice the conventional software management approach.
It is useful to summarize the characteristics of the conventional process as it has typically been applied,
which is not necessarily as it was intended. Projects destined for trouble frequently exhibit the following
symptoms:
Early success via paper designs and thorough (often too thorough) briefings.
Commitment to code late in the life cycle.
Integration nightmares (unpleasant experience) due to unforeseen implementation issues and interface
ambiguities.
Heavy budget and schedule pressure to get the system working.
Late shoe-homing of no optimal fixes, with no time for redesign.
A very fragile, unmentionable product delivered late.
In the conventional model, the entire system was designed on paper, then implemented all at once, then
integrated. Table 1-1 provides a typical profile of cost expenditures across the spectrum of software activities.
Late risk resolution A serious issue associated with the waterfall lifecycle was the lack of early risk resolution.
Figure 1.3 illustrates a typical risk profile for conventional waterfall model projects. It includes four distinct
periods of risk exposure, where risk is defined as the probability of missing a cost, schedule, feature, or quality
goal. Early in the life cycle, as the requirements were being specified, the actual risk exposure was highly
unpredictable.
The following sequence of events was typical for most contractual software efforts:
1. The contractor prepared a draft contract-deliverable document that captured an intermediate artifact
and delivered it to the customer for approval.
2. The customer was expected to provide comments (typically within 15 to 30 days).
3. The contractor incorporated these comments and submitted (typically within 15 to 30 days) a final
version for approval.
This one-shot review process encouraged high levels of sensitivity on the part of customers and contractors.
Barry Boehm's "Industrial Software Metrics Top 10 List” is a good, objective characterization of the state of
software development.
1. Finding and fixing a software problem after delivery costs 100 times more than finding and fixing the
problem in early design phases.
2. You can compress software development schedules 25% of nominal, but no more.
3. For every $1 you spend on development, you will spend $2 on maintenance.
4. Software development and maintenance costs are primarily a function of the number of source lines
of code.
5. Variations among people account for the biggest differences in software productivity.
6. The overall ratio of software to hardware costs is still growing. In 1955 it was 15:85; in 1985, 85:15.
7. Only about 15% of software development effort is devoted to programming.
8. Software systems and products typically cost 3 times as much per SLOC as individual software
programs. Software-system products (i.e., system of systems) cost 9 times as much.
9. Walkthroughs catch 60% of the errors
10. 80% of the contribution comes from 20% of the contributors.
2.Evolution of Software Economics
The relationships among these parameters and the estimated cost can be written as follows:
One important aspect of software economics (as represented within today's software cost models) is that
the relationship between effort and size exhibits a diseconomy of scale. The diseconomy of scale of software
development is a result of the process exponent being greater than 1.0. Contrary to most manufacturing
processes, the more software you build, the more expensive it is per unit item.
Figure 2-1 shows three generations of basic technology advancement in tools, components, and processes.
The required levels of quality and personnel are assumed to be constant. The ordinate of the graph refers to
software unit costs (pick your favorite: per SLOC, per function point, per component) realized by an
organization.
The three generations of software development are defined as follows:
1) Conventional: 1960s and 1970s, craftsmanship. Organizations used custom tools, custom processes,
and virtually all custom components built in primitive languages. Project performance was highly
predictable in that cost, schedule, and quality objectives were almost always underachieved.
2) Transition: 1980s and 1990s, software engineering. Organiz:1tions used more-repeatable processes and off-
the-shelf tools, and mostly (>70%) custom components built in higher level languages. Some of the
components (<30%) were available as commercial products, including the operating system, database
management system, networking, and graphical user interface.
3) Modern practices: 2000 and later, software production. This book's philosophy is rooted in the
use of managed and measured processes, integrated automation environments, and mostly
(70%) off-the-shelf components. Perhaps as few as 30% of the components need to be custom
built
Technologies for environment automation, size reduction, and process improvement are not independent of
one another. In each new era, the key is complementary growth in all technologies. For example, the process
advances could not be used successfully without new component technologies and increased tool automation.
Organizations are achieving better economies of scale in successive technology eras-with very large projects
(systems of systems), long-lived products, and lines of business comprising multiple similar projects. Figure 2-2
provides an overview of how a return on investment (ROI) profile can be achieved in subsequent efforts across
life cycles of various domains.
2.2 PRAGMATIC SOFTWARE COST ESTIMATION
One critical problem in software cost estimation is a lack of well-documented case studies of projects that used
an iterative development approach. Software industry has inconsistently defined metrics or atomic units of
measure, the data from actual projects are highly suspect in terms of consistency and comparability. It is hard
enough to collect a homogeneous set of project data within one organization; it is extremely difficult to homog-
enize data across different organizations with different processes, languages, domains, and so on.
There have been many debates among developers and vendors of software cost estimation models and tools.
Three topics of these debates are of particular interest here:
===THE END===
UNIT – II
Improving Software Economics: Reducing Software product size, improving software processes,
improving team effectiveness, improving automation, Achieving required quality, peer inspections.
The old way and the new: The principles of conventional software Engineering, principles of modern
software management, transitioning to an iterative process.
3.1.1 LANGUAGES
Universal function points (UFPs1) are useful estimators for language-independent, early life-cycle estimates.
The basic units of function points are external user inputs, external outputs, internal logical data groups,
external data interfaces, and external inquiries. SLOC metrics are useful estimators for software after a
candidate solution is formulated and an implementation language is known. Substantial data have been
documented relating SLOC to function points. Some of these results are shown in Table 3-2.
Languages expressiveness of some of today’s popular languages
LANGUAGES SLOC per UFP
Assembly 320
C 128
FORTAN77 105
COBOL85 91
Ada83 71
C++ 56
Ada95 55
Java 55
Visual Basic 35
Table 3-2
1. An object-oriented model of the problem and its solution encourages a common vocabulary
between the end users of a system and its developers, thus creating a shared understanding of the
problem being solved.
2. The use of continuous integration creates opportunities to recognize risk early and make incremental
corrections without destabilizing the entire development effort.
3. An object-oriented architecture provides a clear separation of concerns among disparate elements
of a system, creating firewalls that prevent a change in one part of the system from rending the
fabric of the entire architecture.
1
Function point metrics provide a standardized method for measuring the various functions of a software application.
The basic units of function points are external user inputs, external outputs, internal logical data groups, external data interfaces,
and external inquiries.
1. A ruthless focus on the development of a system that provides a well understood collection of essential
minimal characteristics.
2. The existence of a culture that is centered on results, encourages communication, and yet is not
afraid to fail.
3. The effective use of object-oriented modeling.
4. The existence of a strong architectural vision.
5. The application of a well-managed iterative and incremental development life cycle.
3.1.3 REUSE
Reusing existing components and building reusable components have been natural software engineering
activities since the earliest improvements in programming languages. With reuse in order to minimize
development costs while achieving all the other required attributes of performance, feature set, and quality.
Try to treat reuse as a mundane part of achieving a return on investment.
Most truly reusable components of value are transitioned to commercial products supported by
organizations with the following characteristics:
In a perfect software engineering world with an immaculate problem description, an obvious solution
space, a development team of experienced geniuses, adequate resources, and stakeholders with common
goals, we could execute a software development process in one iteration with almost no scrap and rework.
Because we work in an imperfect world, however, we need to manage engineering activities so that scrap
and rework profiles do not have an impact on the win conditions of any stakeholder. This should be the
underlying premise for most process improvements.
Software project managers need many leadership qualities in order to enhance team effectiveness. The
following are some crucial attributes of successful software project managers that deserve much more
attention:
1. Hiring skills. Few decisions are as important as hiring decisions. Placing the right person in the
right job seems obvious but is surprisingly hard to achieve.
2. Customer-interface skill. Avoiding adversarial relationships among stakeholders is a prerequisite
for success.
Decision-making skill. The jillion books written about management have failed to provide a clear
definition of this attribute. We all know a good leader when we run into one, and decision-making
skill seems obvious despite its intangible definition.
Team-building skill. Teamwork requires that a manager establish trust, motivate progress, exploit
eccentric prima donnas, transition average people into top performers, eliminate misfits, and
consolidate diverse opinions into a team direction.
Selling skill. Successful project managers must sell all stakeholders (including themselves) on decisions
and priorities, sell candidates on job positions, sell changes to the status quo in the face of resistance,
and sell achievements against objectives. In practice, selling requires continuous negotiation,
compromise, and empathy
Key practices that improve overall software quality include the following:
Focusing on driving requirements and critical use cases early in the life cycle, focusing on
requirements completeness and traceability late in the life cycle, and focusing throughout the life
cycle on a balance between requirements evolution, design evolution, and plan evolution
Using metrics and indicators to measure the progress and quality of an architecture as it evolves
from a high-level prototype into a fully compliant product
Providing integrated life-cycle environments that support early and continuous configuration
control, change management, rigorous design methods, document automation, and regression test
automation
Using visual modeling and higher level languages that support architectural control, abstraction,
reliable programming, reuse, and self-documentation
Early and continuous insight into performance issues through demonstration-based evaluations
Conventional development processes stressed early sizing and timing estimates of computer program
resource utilization. However, the typical chronology of events in performance assessment was as
follows
Project inception. The proposed design was asserted to be low risk with adequate performance
margin.
Initial design review. Optimistic assessments of adequate design margin were based mostly on
paper analysis or rough simulation of the critical threads. In most cases, the actual application
algorithms and database sizes were fairly well understood.
Mid-life-cycle design review. The assessments started whittling away at the margin, as early
benchmarks and initial tests began exposing the optimism inherent in earlier estimates.
Integration and test. Serious performance problems were uncovered, necessitating fundamental
changes in the architecture. The underlying infrastructure was usually the scapegoat, but the real
culprit was immature use of the infrastructure, immature architectural solutions, or poorly under-
stood early design trade-offs.
Transitioning engineering information from one artifact set to another, thereby assessing the
consistency, feasibility, understandability, and technology constraints inherent in the engineering
artifacts
Major milestone demonstrations that force the artifacts to be assessed against tangible criteria in
the context of relevant use cases
Environment tools (compilers, debuggers, analyzers, automated test suites) that ensure
representation rigor, consistency, completeness, and change control
Life-cycle testing for detailed insight into critical trade-offs, acceptance criteria, and requirements
compliance
Change management metrics for objective insight into multiple-perspective change trends and
convergence or divergence from quality and progress goals
Inspections are also a good vehicle for holding authors accountable for quality products. All authors of
software and documentation should have their products scrutinized as a natural by-product of the
process. Therefore, the coverage of inspections should be across all authors rather than across all
components.
Top 10 principles of modern software management are. (The first five, which are the main themes of my definition of an
iterative process, are summarized in Figure 4-1.)
Base the process on an architecture-first approach. This requires that a demonstrable balance be
achieved among the driving requirements, the architecturally significant design decisions, and the life-
cycle plans before the resources are committed for full-scale development.
Establish an iterative life-cycle process that confronts risk early. With today's sophisticated software
systems, it is not possible to define the entire problem, design the entire solution, build the software,
and then test the end product in sequence. Instead, an iterative process that refines the problem
understanding, an effective solution, and an effective plan over several iterations encourages a balanced
treatment of all stakeholder objectives. Major risks must be addressed early to increase predictability
and avoid expensive downstream scrap and rework.
Transition design methods to emphasize component-based development. Moving from a line-of-code
mentality to a component-based mentality is necessary to reduce the amount of human-generated source
code and custom development.
Table 4-1 maps top 10 risks of the conventional process to the key attributes and principles of a modern
process
4.3 TRANSITIONING TO AN ITERATIVE PROCESS
Modern software development processes have moved away from the conventional waterfall model, in which
each stage of the development process is dependent on completion of the previous stage.
The economic benefits inherent in transitioning from the conventional waterfall model to an iterative
development process are significant but difficult to quantify. As one benchmark of the expected economic
impact of process improvement, consider the process exponent parameters of the COCOMO II model.
(Appendix B provides more detail on the COCOMO model) This exponent can range from 1.01 (virtually no
diseconomy of scale) to 1.26 (significant diseconomy of scale). The parameters that govern the value of the
process exponent are application precedentedness, process flexibility, architecture risk resolution, team
cohesion, and software process maturity.
The following paragraphs map the process exponent parameters of CO COMO II to my top 10
principles of a modern process.
Application precedentedness. Domain experience is a critical factor in understanding how to plan and
execute a software development project. For unprecedented systems, one of the key goals is to confront
risks and establish early precedents, even if they are incomplete or experimental. This is one of the
primary reasons that the software industry has moved to an iterative life-cycle process. Early iterations
in the life cycle establish precedents from which the product, the process, and the plans can be elab-
orated in evolving levels of detail.
Process flexibility. Development of modern software is characterized by such a broad solution space
and so many interrelated concerns that there is a paramount need for continuous incorporation of
changes. These changes may be inherent in the problem understanding, the solution space, or the plans.
Project artifacts must be supported by efficient change management commensurate with project
needs. A configurable process that allows a common framework to be adapted across a range of
projects is necessary to achieve a software return on investment.
Architecture risk resolution. Architecture-first development is a crucial theme underlying a
successful iterative development process. A project team develops and stabilizes architecture before
developing all the components that make up the entire suite of applications components. An
architecture-first and component-based development approach forces the infrastructure, common
mechanisms, and control mechanisms to be elaborated early in the life cycle and drives all component
make/buy decisions into the architecture process.
Team cohesion. Successful teams are cohesive, and cohesive teams are successful. Successful teams
and cohesive teams share common objectives and priorities. Advances in technology (such as
programming languages, UML, and visual modeling) have enabled more rigorous and understandable
notations for communicating software engineering information, particularly in the requirements and
design artifacts that previously were ad hoc and based completely on paper exchange. These model-
based formats have also enabled the round-trip engineering support needed to establish change
freedom sufficient for evolving design representations.
Software process maturity. The Software Engineering Institute's Capability Maturity Model (CMM)
is a well-accepted benchmark for software process assessment. One of key themes is that truly mature
processes are enabled through an integrated environment that provides the appropriate level of automa-
tion to instrument the process for objective quality control.
Important questions
Explain briefly Waterfall model. Also explain Conventional s/w management performance?
1.
4. Explain five staffing principal offered by Boehm. Also explain Peer Inspections?
To achieve economies of scale and higher returns on investment, we must move toward a software
manufacturing process driven by technological improvements in process automation and component-based
development. Two stages of the life cycle are:
1. The engineering stage, driven by less predictable but smaller teams doing design and synthesis
activities
2. The production stage, driven by more predictable but larger teams doing construction, test, and
deployment activities
The transition between engineering and production is a crucial event for the various stakeholders. The
production plan has been agreed upon, and there is a good enough understanding of the problem and the
solution that all stakeholders can make a firm commitment to go ahead with production.
1
Engineering stage is decomposed into two distinct phases, inception and elaboration, and the production stage
into construction and transition. These four phases of the life-cycle process are loosely mapped to the
conceptual framework of the spiral model as shown in Figure 5-1
PRIMARY OBJECTIVES
Establishing the project's software scope and boundary conditions, including an operational concept,
acceptance criteria, and a clear understanding of what is and is not intended to be in the product
Discriminating the critical use cases of the system and the primary scenarios of operation that will
drive the major design trade-offs
Demonstrating at least one candidate architecture against some of the primary scenanos
Estimating the cost and schedule for the entire project (including detailed estimates for the
elaboration phase)
Estimating potential risks (sources of unpredictability)
ESSENTIAL ACTMTIES
Formulating the scope of the project. The information repository should be sufficient to define the
problem space and derive the acceptance criteria for the end product.
Synthesizing the architecture. An information repository is created that is sufficient to demonstrate the
feasibility of at least one candidate architecture and an, initial baseline of make/buy decisions so that
the cost, schedule, and resource estimates can be derived.
Planning and preparing a business case. Alternatives for risk management, staffing, iteration plans,
and cost/schedule/profitability trade-offs are evaluated.
PRIMARY EVALUATION CRITERIA
Do all stakeholders concur on the scope definition and cost and schedule estimates?
Are requirements understood, as evidenced by the fidelity of the critical use cases?
Are the cost and schedule estimates, priorities, risks, and development processes credible?
Do the depth and breadth of an architecture prototype demonstrate the preceding criteria? (The
primary value of prototyping candidate architecture is to provide a vehicle for understanding the
scope and assessing the credibility of the development group in solving the particular technical
2
problem.)
Are actual resource expenditures versus planned expenditures acceptable
At the end of this phase, the "engineering" is considered complete. The elaboration phase activities must ensure
that the architecture, requirements, and plans are stable enough, and the risks sufficiently mitigated, that the cost
and schedule for the completion of the development can be predicted within an acceptable range. During the
elaboration phase, an executable architecture prototype is built in one or more iterations, depending on the
scope, size, & risk.
PRIMARY OBJECTIVES
Baselining the architecture as rapidly as practical (establishing a configuration-managed snapshot in which
all changes are rationalized, tracked, and maintained)
Baselining the vision
Baselining a high-fidelity plan for the construction phase
Demonstrating that the baseline architecture will support the vision at a reasonable cost in a reasonable
time
ESSENTIAL ACTIVITIES
Elaborating the vision.
Elaborating the process and infrastructure.
Elaborating the architecture and selecting components.
PRIMARY OBJECTIVES
Minimizing development costs by optimizing resources and avoiding unnecessary scrap and rework
Achieving adequate quality as rapidly as practical
Achieving useful versions (alpha, beta, and other test releases) as rapidly as practical
3
ESSENTIAL ACTIVITIES
Resource management, control, and process optimization
Complete component development and testing against evaluation criteria
Assessment of product releases against acceptance criteria of the vision
PRIMARY OBJECTIVES
Achieving user self-supportability
Achieving stakeholder concurrence that deployment baselines are complete and consistent with the
evaluation criteria of the vision
Achieving final product baselines as rapidly and cost-effectively as practical
ESSENTIAL ACTIVITIES
Synchronization and integration of concurrent construction increments into consistent deployment
baselines
Deployment-specific engineering (cutover, commercial packaging and production, sales rollout kit
development, field personnel training)
Assessment of deployment baselines against the complete vision and acceptance criteria in the
requirements set
EVALUATION CRITERIA
Is the user satisfied?
Are actual resource expenditures versus planned expenditures acceptable ?
4
6. Artifacts of the process
5
6.1.2 THE ENGINEERING SETS
The engineering sets consist of the requirements set, the design set, the implementation set, and the
deployment set.
Requirements Set
Requirements artifacts are evaluated, assessed, and measured through a combination of the following:
Design Set
UML notation is used to engineer the design models for the solution. The design set contains varying levels
of abstraction that represent the components of the solution space (their identities, attributes, static
relationships, dynamic interactions). The design set is evaluated, assessed, and measured through a combination
of the following:
Analysis of the internal consistency and quality of the design model
Analysis of consistency with the requirements models
Translation into implementation and deployment sets and notations (for example, traceability, source
code generation, compilation, linking) to evaluate the consistency and completeness and the semantic
balance between information in the sets
Analysis of changes between the current version of the design model and previous versions (scrap,
rework, and defect elimination trends)
Subjective review of other dimensions of quality
Implementation set
The implementation set includes source code (programming language notations) that represents the tangible
implementations of components (their form, interface, and dependency relationships)
Implementation sets are human-readable formats that are evaluated, assessed, and measured through a
combination of the following:
Analysis of consistency with the design models
Translation into deployment set notations (for example, compilation and linking) to evaluate the
consistency and completeness among artifact sets
Assessment of component source or executable files against relevant evaluation criteria through
inspection, analysis, demonstration, or testing
Execution of stand-alone component test cases that automatically compare expected results with
actual results
Analysis of changes between the current version of the implementation set and previous versions
(scrap, rework, and defect elimination trends)
Subjective review of other dimensions of quality
6
Deployment Set
The deployment set includes user deliverables and machine language notations, executable software, and the
build scripts, installation scripts, and executable target specific data necessary to use the product in its target
environment.
Deployment sets are evaluated, assessed, and measured through a combination of the following:
Testing against the usage scenarios and quality attributes defined in the requirements set to evaluate
the consistency and completeness and the~ semantic balance between information in the two sets
Testing the partitioning, replication, and allocation strategies in mapping components of the
implementation set to physical resources of the deployment system (platform type, number, network
topology)
Testing against the defined usage scenarios in the user manual such as installation, user-oriented
dynamic reconfiguration, mainstream usage, and anomaly management
Analysis of changes between the current version of the deployment set and previous versions (defect
elimination trends, performance changes)
Subjective review of other dimensions of quality
Each artifact set is the predominant development focus of one phase of the life cycle; the other sets take on
check and balance roles. As illustrated in Figure 6-2, each phase has a predominant focus: Requirements are the
focus of the inception phase; design, the elaboration phase; implementation, the construction phase; and deploy-
ment, the transition phase. The management artifacts also evolve, but at a fairly constant level across the life
cycle.
Most of today's software development tools map closely to one of the five artifact sets.
1. Management: scheduling, workflow, defect tracking, change management,
documentation, spreadsheet, resource management, and presentation tools
2. Requirements: requirements management tools
3. Design: visual modeling tools
4. Implementation: compiler/debugger tools, code analysis tools, test coverage analysis tools, and test
management tools
5. Deployment: test coverage and test automation tools, network management tools, commercial components
(operating systems, GUIs, RDBMS, networks, middleware), and installation tools.
7
Implementation Set versus Deployment Set
The separation of the implementation set (source code) from the deployment set (executable code) is important
because there are very different concerns with each set. The structure of the information delivered to the user
(and typically the test organization) is very different from the structure of the source code information.
Engineering decisions that have an impact on the quality of the deployment set but are relatively
incomprehensible in the design and implementation sets include the following:
Dynamically reconfigurable parameters (buffer sizes, color palettes, number of servers, number of
simultaneous clients, data files, run-time parameters)
Effects of compiler/link optimizations (such as space optimization versus speed optimization)
Performance under certain allocation strategies (centralized versus distributed, primary and shadow
threads, dynamic load balancing, hot backup versus checkpoint/rollback)
Virtual machine constraints (file descriptors, garbage collection, heap size, maximum record size,
disk file rotations)
Process-level concurrency issues (deadlock and race conditions)
Platform-specific differences in performance or behavior
The inception phase focuses mainly on critical requirements usually with a secondary focus on an initial
deployment view. During the elaboration phase, there is much greater depth in requirements, much more
breadth in the design set, and further work on implementation and deployment issues. The main focus of the
construction phase is design and implementation. The main focus of the transition phase is on achieving
consistency and completeness of the deployment set in the context of the other sets.
8
6.1.4 TEST ARTIFACTS
The test artifacts must be developed concurrently with the product from inception through
deployment. Thus, testing is a full-life-cycle activity, not a late life-cycle activity.
The test artifacts are communicated, engineered, and developed within the same artifact sets as the
developed product.
The test artifacts are implemented in programmable and repeatable formats (as software programs).
The test artifacts are documented in the same way that the product is documented.
Developers of the test artifacts use the same tools, techniques, and training as the software engineers
developing the product.
Test artifact subsets are highly project-specific, the following example clarifies the relationship between test
artifacts and the other artifact sets. Consider a project to perform seismic data processing for the purpose of oil
exploration. This system has three fundamental subsystems: (1) a sensor subsystem that captures raw seismic
data in real time and delivers these data to (2) a technical operations subsystem that converts raw data into an
organized database and manages queries to this database from (3) a display subsystem that allows workstation
operators to examine seismic data in human-readable form. Such a system would result in the following test
artifacts:
Management set. The release specifications and release descriptions capture the objectives,
evaluation criteria, and results of an intermediate milestone. These artifacts are the test plans and test
results negotiated among internal project teams. The software change orders capture test results
(defects, testability changes, requirements ambiguities, enhancements) and the closure criteria
associated with making a discrete change to a baseline.
Requirements set. The system-level use cases capture the operational concept for the system and the
acceptance test case descriptions, including the expected behavior of the system and its quality
attributes. The entire requirement set is a test artifact because it is the basis of all assessment
activities across the life cycle.
Design set. A test model for nondeliverable components needed to test the product baselines is
captured in the design set. These components include such design set artifacts as a seismic event
simulation for creating realistic sensor data; a "virtual operator" that can support unattended, after-
hours test cases; specific instrumentation suites for early demonstration of resource usage; transaction
rates or response times; and use case test drivers and component stand-alone test drivers.
Implementation set. Self-documenting source code representations for test components and test
drivers provide the equivalent of test procedures and test scripts. These source files may also include
human-readable data files representing certain statically defined data sets that are explicit test source
files. Output files from test drivers provide the equivalent of test reports.
Deployment set. Executable versions of test components, test drivers, and data files are provided.
10
Work Breakdown Structure
Work breakdown structure (WBS) is the vehicle for budgeting and collecting costs. To monitor and control a
project's financial performance, the software project man1ger must have insight into project costs and how they
are expended. The structure of cost accountability is a serious project planning constraint.
Release Specifications
The scope, plan, and objective evaluation criteria for each baseline release are derived from the vision statement
as well as many other sources (make/buy analyses, risk management concerns, architectural considerations,
shots in the dark, implementation constraints, quality thresholds). These artifacts are intended to evolve along
with the process, achieving greater fidelity as the life cycle progresses and requirements understanding matures.
Figure 6-6 provides a default outline for a release specification
Release Descriptions
Release description documents describe the results of each release, including performance against each of the
evaluation criteria in the corresponding release specification. Release baselines should be accompanied by a
release description document that describes the evaluation criteria for that configuration baseline and provides
substantiation (through demonstration, testing, inspection, or analysis) that each criterion has been addressed in
an acceptable manner. Figure 6-7 provides a default outline for a release description.
Status Assessments
Status assessments provide periodic snapshots of project health and status, including the software project
manager's risk assessment, quality indicators, and management indicators. Typical status assessments should
include a review of resources, personnel staffing, financial data (cost and revenue), top 10 risks, technical
progress (metrics snapshots), major milestone plans and results, total project or product scope & action items
11
Environment
An important emphasis of a modern approach is to define the development and maintenance environment as a
first-class artifact of the process. A robust, integrated development environment must support automation of the
development process. This environment should include requirements management, visual modeling, document
automation, host and target programming tools, automated regression testing, and continuous and integrated
change management, and feature and defect tracking.
Deployment
A deployment document can take many forms. Depending on the project, it could include several document
subsets for transitioning the product into operational status. In big contractual efforts in which the system is
delivered to a separate maintenance organization, deployment artifacts may include computer system operations
manuals, software installation manuals, plans and procedures for cutover (from a legacy system), site surveys,
and so forth. For commercial software products, deployment artifacts may include marketing plans, sales rollout
kits, and training courses.
12
13
6.3 ENGINEERING ARTIFACTS
Most of the engineering artifacts are captured in rigorous engineering notations such as UML, programming
languages, or executable machine codes. Three engineering artifacts are explicitly intended for more general
review, and they deserve further elaboration.
Vision Document
The vision document provides a complete vision for the software system under development and. supports the
contract between the funding authority and the development organization. A project vision is meant to be
changeable as understanding evolves of the requirements, architecture, plans, and technology. A good vision
document should change slowly. Figure 6-9 provides a default outline for a vision document.
Architecture Description
The architecture description provides an organized view of the software architecture under development. It is
extracted largely from the design model and includes views of the design, implementation, and deployment sets
sufficient to understand how the operational concept of the requirements set will be achieved. The breadth of
the architecture description will vary from project to project depending on many factors. Figure 6-10 provides a
default outline for an architecture description.
14
Software User Manual
The software user manual provides the user with the reference documentation necessary to support the delivered
software. Although content is highly variable across application domains, the user manual should include
installation procedures, usage procedures and guidance, operational constraints, and a user interface description,
at a minimum. For software products with a user interface, this manual should be developed early in the life
cycle because it is a necessary mechanism for communicating and stabilizing an important subset of
requirements. The user manual should be written by members of the test team, who are more likely to
understand the user's perspective than the development team.
15
UNIT - IV
Model based software architectures: A Management perspective and technical perspective.
Work Flows of the process: Software process workflows, Iteration workflows.
7. Model based software architecture
7.1 ARCHITECTURE: A MANAGEMENT PERSPECTIVE
The most critical technical product of a software project is its architecture: the infrastructure,
control, and data interfaces that permit software components to cooperate as a system and
software designers to cooperate efficiently as a team. When the communications media
include multiple languages and intergroup literacy varies, the communications problem can
become extremely complex and even unsolvable. If a software development team is to be
successful, the inter project communications, as captured in the software architecture, must
be both accurate and precise
From a management perspective, there are three different aspects of architecture.
1. An architecture (the intangible design concept) is the design of a software system
this includes all engineering necessary to specify a complete bill of materials.
2. An architecture baseline (the tangible artifacts) is a slice of information across the
engineering artifact sets sufficient to satisfy all stakeholders that the vision
(function and quality) can be achieved within the parameters of the business case
(cost, profit, time, technology, and people).
3. An architecture description (a human-readable representation of an architecture,
which is one of the components of an architecture baseline) is an organized subset
of information extracted from the design set model(s). The architecture
description communicates how the intangible concept is realized in the tangible
artifacts.
The number of views and the level of detail in each view can vary widely.
The importance of software architecture and its close linkage with modern software
development processes can be summarized as follows:
Achieving a stable software architecture represents a significant project milestone
at which the critical make/buy decisions should have been resolved.
Architecture representations provide a basis for balancing the trade-offs between
the problem space (requirements and constraints) and the solution space (the
operational product).
The architecture and process encapsulate many of the important (high-payoff or
high-risk) communications among individuals, teams, organizations, and
stakeholders.
Poor architectures and immature processes are often given as reasons for project
failures.
A mature process, an understanding of the primary requirements, and a
demonstrable architecture are important prerequisites for predictable planning.
Architecture development and process definition are the intellectual steps that map
the problem to a solution without violating the constraints; they require human
innovation and cannot be automated.
Table 8-1 shows the allocation of artifacts and the emphasis of each workflow in each of the
life-cycle phases of inception, elaboration, construction, and transition.
8.2 ITERATION WORKFLOWS
Iteration consists of a loosely sequential set of activities in various proportions, depending on
where the iteration is located in the development cycle. Each iteration is defined in terms of a
set of allocated usage scenarios. An individual iteration's workflow, illustrated in Figure 8-2,
generally includes the following sequence:
Management: iteration planning to determine the content of the release and develop
the detailed plan for the iteration; assignment of work packages, or tasks, to the
development team
Environment: evolving the software change order database to reflect all new
baselines and changes to existing baselines for all product, test, and environment
components
Requirements: analyzing the baseline plan, the baseline architecture, and the
baseline requirements set artifacts to fully elaborate the use cases to be
demonstrated at the end of this iteration and their evaluation criteria; updating any
requirements set artifacts to reflect changes necessitated by results of this
iteration's engineering activities
Design: evolving the baseline architecture and the baseline design set artifacts to
elaborate fully the design model and test model components necessary to
demonstrate against the evaluation criteria allocated to this iteration; updating
design set artifacts to reflect changes necessitated by the results of this iteration's
engineering activities
Implementation: developing or acquiring any new components, and enhancing or
modifying any existing components, to demonstrate the evaluation criteria
allocated to this iteration; integrating and testing all new and modified
components with existing baselines (previous versions)
Assessment: evaluating the results of the iteration, including compliance with the
allocated evaluation criteria and the quality of the current baselines; identifying
any rework required and determining whether it should be performed before
deployment of this release or allocated to the next release; assessing results to
improve the basis of the subsequent iteration's plan
Deployment: transitioning the release either to an external organization (such as a
user, independent verification and validation contractor, or regulatory agency) or
to internal closure by conducting a post-mortem so that lessons learned can be
captured and reflected in the next iteration
Iterations in the inception and elaboration phases focus on management. Requirements, and
design activities. Iterations in the construction phase focus on design, implementation, and
assessment. Iterations in the transition phase focus on assessment and deployment. Figure 8-
3 shows the emphasis on different activities across the life cycle. An iteration represents the
state of the overall architecture and the complete deliverable system. An increment
represents the current progress that will be combined with the preceding iteration to from the
next iteration. Figure 8-4, an example of a simple development life cycle, illustrates the
differences between iterations and increments.
UNIT - V
Checkpoints of the process: Major mile stones, Minor Milestones, Periodic status
assessments.
Iterative Process Planning: Work breakdown structures, planning guidelines, cost and
schedule estimating, Iteration planning process, Pragmatic planning.
1. Major milestones. These system wide events are held at the end of each
development phase. They provide visibility to system wide issues, synchronize
the management and engineering perspectives, and verify that the aims of the
phase have been achieved.
2. Minor milestones. These iteration-focused events are conducted to review the
content of an iteration in detail and to authorize continued work.
3. Status assessments. These periodic events provide management with frequent and
regular insight into the progress being made.
Each of the four phases-inception, elaboration, construction, and transition consists of one or
more iterations and concludes with a major milestone when a planned technical capability is
produced in demonstrable form. An iteration represents a cycle of activities for which there is
a well-defined intermediate result-a minor milestone-captured with two artifacts: a release
specification (the evaluation criteria and plan) and a release description (the results). Major
milestones at the end of each phase use formal, stakeholder-approved evaluation criteria and
release descriptions; minor milestones use informal, development-team-controlled versions of
these artifacts.
Figure 9-1 illustrates a typical sequence of project checkpoints for a relatively large project.
9.1 MAJOR MILESTONES
The four major milestones occur at the transition points between life-cycle phases. They can
be used in many different process models, including the conventional waterfall model. In an
iterative model, the major milestones are used to achieve concurrence among all stakeholders
on the current state of the project. Different stakeholders have very different concerns:
The format and content of these minor milestones tend to be highly dependent on the project
and the organizational culture. Figure 9-4 identifies the various minor milestones to be
considered when a project is being planned.
The default content of periodic status assessments should include the topics identified in
Table 9-2.
Management
System requirement and design
Subsystem 1
Component 11
Requirements
Design
Code
Test
Documentation
…(similar structures for other components)
Component 1N
Requirements
Design
Code
Test
Documentation
…(similar structures for other subsystems)
Subsystem M
Component M1
Requirements
Design
Code
Test
Documentation
…(similar structures for other components)
Component MN
Requirements
Design
Code
Test
Documentation
Integration and test
Test planning
Test procedure preparation
Testing
Test reports
Other support areas
Configuration control
Quality assurance
System administration
10.1.2 EVOLUTIONARY WORK BREAKDOWN STRUCTURES
An evolutionary WBS should organize the planning elements around the process framework
rather than the product framework. The basic recommendation for the WBS is to organize
the hierarchy as follows:
Inception Elaboration
Transition Construction
1. The software project manager (and others) develops a characterization of the overall
size, process, environment, people, and quality required for the project.
2. A macro-level estimate of the total effort and schedule is developed using a
software cost estimation model.
3. The software project manager partitions the estimate for the effort into a top-level
WBS using guidelines such as those in Table 10-1.
4. At this point, subproject managers are given the responsibility for decomposing
each of the WBS elements into lower levels using their top-level allocation, staffing
profile, and major milestone dates as constraints.
The second perspective is a backward-looking, bottom-up approach. We start with the end in
mind, analyze the micro-level budgets and schedules, then sum all these elements into the
higher level budgets and intermediate milestones. This approach tends to define and
populate the WBS from the lowest levels upward. From this perspective, the following
planning sequence would occur:
1. The lowest level WBS elements are elaborated into detailed tasks
2. Estimates are combined and integrated into higher level budgets and milestones.
3. Comparisons are made with the top-down budgets and schedule milestones.
Milestone scheduling or budget allocation through top-down estimating tends to exaggerate
the project management biases and usually results in an overly optimistic plan. Bottom-up
estimates usually exaggerate the performer biases and result in an overly pessimistic plan.
These two planning approaches should be used together, in balance, throughout the life
cycle of the project. During the engineering stage, the top-down perspective will dominate
because there is usually not enough depth of understanding nor stability in the detailed task
sequences to perform credible bottom-up planning. During the production stage, there should
be enough precedent experience and planning fidelity that the bottom-up planning
perspective will dominate. Top-down approach should be well tuned to the project-specific
parameters, so it should be used more as a global assessment technique. Figure 10-4
illustrates this life-cycle planning balance.
Macro level task estimation for Micro level task estimation for
production stage artifacts production stage artifacts
Micro level task estimation for Macro level task estimation for
engineering artifacts maintenance of engineering artifacts
Stakeholder concurrence Stakeholder concurrence
Coarse grained variance analysis of Fine grained variance analysis of actual
actual vs planned expenditures vs planned expenditures
Tuning the top down project
independent planning guidelines into
project specific planning guidelines
WBS definition and elaboration
1) Line-Of-Business Organizations:
The main features of default organization are as follows:
• Responsibility for process definition & maintenance is specific to a cohesive line of business.
• Responsibility for process automation is an organizational role & is equal in importance to
the process definition role.
• Organizational role may be fulfilled by a single individual or several different teams.
___________________________________________________________________________________
Software Engineering Process Authority (SEPA)
The SEPA facilities the exchange of information & process guidance both to & from project
practitioners
This role is accountable to General Manager for maintaining a current assessment of the
organization’s process maturity & its plan for future improvement
Project Review Authority (PRA)
The PRA is the single individual responsible for ensuring that a software project complies
with all organizational & business unit software policies, practices & standards
A software Project Manager is responsible for meeting the requirements of a contract or some
other project compliance standard
Software Engineering Environment Authority( SEEA )
The SEEA is responsible for automating the organization’s process, maintaining the
organization’s standard environment, Training projects to use the environment & maintaining
organization-wide reusable assets
The SEEA role is necessary to achieve a significant ROI for common process.
Infrastructure
An organization’s infrastructure provides human resources support, project-independent
research & development, & other capital software engineering assets.
2) Project organizations:
Software Management
Artifacts Activities
• The above figure shows a default project organization and maps project-level roles and
responsibilities.
• The main features of the default organization are as follows:
• The project management team is an active participant, responsible for producing as well
___________________________________________________________________________________
as managing.
• The architecture team is responsible for real artifacts and for the integration of
components, not just for staff functions.
• The development team owns the component construction and maintenance activities.
• The assessment team is separate from development.
• Quality is everyone’s into all activities and checkpoints.
• Each team takes responsibility for a different quality perspective.
3) EVOLUTION OF ORGANIZATIONS:
Software Software
Management Management
50% 10%
Inception Elaboration
Software Software
Management Management
10% 10%
Transition Construction
Inception: Elaboration:
Software management: 50% Software management: 10%
Software Architecture: 20% Software Architecture: 50%
Software development: 20% Software development: 20%
Software Assessment Software Assessment
(measurement/evaluation):10% (measurement/evaluation):20%
Construction: Transition:
Software management: 10% Software management: 10%
Software Architecture: 10% Software Architecture: 5%
Software development: 50% Software development: 35%
Software Assessment Software Assessment
(measurement/evaluation):30% (measurement/evaluation):50%
___________________________________________________________________________________
The environment must be the first-class artifact of the process.
Process automation & change management is critical to an iterative process. If the change is expensive
then the development organization will resist it.
Round-trip engineering & integrated environments promote change freedom & effective evolution of
technical artifacts.
Metric automation is crucial to effective project control.
External stakeholders need access to environment resources to improve interaction with the development
team & add value to the process.
The three levels of process which requires a certain degree of process automation for the corresponding
process to be carried out efficiently.
Metaprocess (Line of business): The automation support for this level is called an infrastructure.
Macroproces (project): The automation support for a project’s process is called an environment.
Microprocess (iteration): The automation support for generating artifacts is generally called a tool.
Change Management
Change management must be automated & enforced to manage multiple iterations & to enable change
freedom.
Change is the fundamental primitive of iterative Development.
___________________________________________________________________________________
I. Software Change Orders
The atomic unit of software work that is authorized to create, modify or obsolesce components within a
configuration baseline is called a software change orders ( SCO )
The basic fields of the SCO are Title, description, metrics, resolution, assessment & disposition
Change management
II.Configuration Baseline
A configuration baseline is a named collection of software components &Supporting
documentation that is subjected to change management & is upgraded, maintained, tested, statuses
& obsolesced a unit
There are generally two classes of baselines
External Product Release
Internal testing Release
Three levels of baseline releases are required for most Systems
___________________________________________________________________________________
1. Major release (N)
2. Minor Release (M)
3. Interim (temporary) Release (X)
Major release represents a new generation of the product or project
A minor release represents the same basic product but with enhanced features, performance or
quality.
Major & Minor releases are intended to be external product releases that are persistent &
supported for a period of time.
An interim release corresponds to a developmental configuration that is intended to be transient.
Once software is placed in a controlled baseline all changes are tracked such that a distinction must
be made for the cause of the change. Change categories are
Type 0: Critical Failures (must be fixed before release)
Type 1: A bug or defect either does not impair (Harm) the usefulness of the system or can be
worked around
Type 2: A change that is an enhancement rather than a response to a defect
Type 3: A change that is necessitated by the update to the environment
Type 4: Changes that are not accommodated by the other categories.
Change Management
III Configuration Control Board (CCB)
A CCB is a team of people that functions as the decision
Authority on the content of configuration baselines
A CCB includes:
1. Software managers
2. Software Architecture managers
3. Software Development managers
4. Software Assessment managers
5. Other Stakeholders who are integral to the maintenance of the controlled software
delivery system?
Infrastructure
The organization infrastructure provides the organization’s capital assets including two key
artifacts - Policy & Environment
I Organization Policy:
A Policy captures the standards for project software development processes
The organization policy is usually packaged as a handbook that defines the life cycles & the
process primitives such as
Major milestones
Intermediate Artifacts
Engineering repositories
Metrics
Roles & Responsibilities
___________________________________________________________________________________
Infrastructure
II Organization Environment
The Environment that captures an inventory of tools which are building blocks from which project
environments can be configured efficiently & economically
Stakeholder Environment
Many large scale projects include people in external organizations that represent other stakeholders
participating in the development process they might include
Procurement agency contract monitors
End-user engineering support personnel
Third party maintenance contractors
Independent verification & validation contractors
Representatives of regulatory agencies & others.
These stakeholder representatives also need to access to development resources so that they can
contribute value to overall effort. These stakeholders will be access through on-line
An on-line environment accessible by the external stakeholders allow them to participate in the
process a follows
Accept & use executable increments for the hands-on evaluation.
Use the same on-line tools, data & reports that the development organization uses to manage &
monitor the project
Avoid excessive travel, paper interchange delays, format translations, paper * shipping costs &
other overhead cost
___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________