Indian Journal of Science and Technology

Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access

A Methodological Approach for Software Architecture Recovery


Affiliations
1 Department of System Engineering, University of Cartagena, Colombia
 

Background/Objectives: The software architecture recovery process is an activity that is included in different contexts. However, the methodological proposals to perform this process do not take into account the particular needs of the context in which it is developed. The objective of this work is to propose a methodology for Software Architecture Recovery, responding the specific needs of the context in which the need to recover the architecture of a software product is presented. Methods: The model was obtained after applying the pattern-matching technique in order to establish the common aspects to all the proposals identified in the literature review. Findings: The results of the evaluation of the methodological proposal reveal the usefulness when recovering architectures, since it allows focusing attention on the most relevant aspects of recovery for the specific context in which the process is performed. Novelty: The defined methodological proposal is a new way of performing architecture recovery processes, which achieves more relevant results to the context in which the needs arise.
User

  • Ganesh S, Girish S, Arbind KG, Raghu N. FOCUS: An adaptation of a SWEBOK-based curriculum for industry requirements. 34th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE). 2012; p. 1215–24.

  • Canfora G, Di Penta M. Cerulo YL. Achievements and Challenges in Software Reverse Engineering, communications of the ACM. 2011; 54(4):142–51.

  • Monroy M, Arciniegas JL, Rodríguez JC. Characterization of the contexts of use of reverse engineering. Información tecnológica. 2017 July; 28(4):75–84.

  • Monroy M, Rodríguez J, Puello P. Characterization Model of Software Architectures Recovery Process. Indian Journal of Science and Technology. 2018; 11(1):1–10. Crossref.

  • Eisenbarth T, Koschke R, Simon D. Locating features in source code. IEEE Transactions on Software -Engineering. 2003; 29(3):210–24. Crossref.

  • Favre JM. Cacophony: Metamodel-driven software architecture reconstruction. IEEE 11th Working Conference on Reverse Engineering. 2004 November; p. 204–13.

  • Callo Arias TB, Avgeriou P, America, P, Blom K, Bachynskyy S. A top-down strategy to reverse architecting execution views for a large and complex software-intensive system: An experience report. Science of Computer Programming. 2011; 76(12):1098–112. Crossref.

  • Boussaidi GE, Belle AB, Vaucher S, Mili H. Reconstructing architectural views from legacy systems. IEEE 19th Working Conference on Reverse Engineering. 2012; p. 345–54. Crossref.

  • Garcia J, Krka I, Medvidovic N, Douglas C. A framework for obtaining the ground-truth in architectural recovery. Joint Working IEEE/IFIP Conference on Software Architecture and European Conference on Software Architecture. 2012; p. 292–96. Crossref.

  • Pinzger M, Gall H, Girard JF, Knodel J, Riva C, Pasman W,Wijnstra JG. Architecture recovery for product families. In Software Product-Family Engineering. Heidelberg; Springer, Berlin. 2003; p. 332–51.

  • Kang S, Lee S, Lee D. A framework for tool-based software architecture reconstruction. International -Journal of Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering. 2009; 19(2):283–305. Crossref.

  • Stoermer C, Brien L, Verhoef C. Moving towards quality attribute driven software architecture reconstruction. Proceedings 10th Working Conference on Reverse Engineering (WCRE). 2003 November; p. 46–56.

  • Guo GY, Atlee JM, Kazman R. A software architecture reconstruction method. Springer US. 1999; p. 15–33. Crossref.

  • Deursen VA, Hofmeister C, Koschke R, Moonen L, Riva C. Symphony: View-driven software architecture reconstruction. Proceedings. Fourth Working IEEE/IFIP Conference on Software Architecture (WICSA). 2004 June; p. 122–32. Crossref.

  • Vasconcelos A, Werner C. Evaluating reuse and program understanding in ArchMine architecture recovery approach. Information Sciences. 2011; 181(13):2761–86. Crossref.

  • Kazman R, O’Brien L, Verhoef C. Architecture reconstruction guidelines. Third Edition. Carnegie Mellon University. Software Engineering Institute, Pittsburgh. 2003; p. 1–43.

  • Kitchenham BA, Budgen D, Brereton OP. Using mapping studies as the basis for further research - A participant observer case study. Information and Software Technology. 2011; 53(6):638–51. Crossref.

  • Monroy M, Arciniegas JL, Rodríguez JC. Recuperación de Arquitecturas de Software: Un Mapeo Sistemático de la Literatura. Información tecnológica, 2016 September; 27(5)201–20

  • Yin RK. Case study research: Design and methods. Sage publications; 2013.

  • McGregor SL, Murnane JA. Paradigm, methodology and method: Intellectual integrity in consumer scholarship. International Journal of Consumer Studies. 2010; 34(4):419–27. Crossref.

  • Ducasse S, Pollet D. Software architecture reconstruction: A process-oriented taxonomy. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering. 2009 April; 35(4):573–91. Crossref.


Abstract Views: 202

PDF Views: 0




  • A Methodological Approach for Software Architecture Recovery

Abstract Views: 202  |  PDF Views: 0

Authors

R. Martin Monroy
Department of System Engineering, University of Cartagena, Colombia
Julio R. Ribon
Department of System Engineering, University of Cartagena, Colombia
Plinio Puello
Department of System Engineering, University of Cartagena, Colombia

Abstract


Background/Objectives: The software architecture recovery process is an activity that is included in different contexts. However, the methodological proposals to perform this process do not take into account the particular needs of the context in which it is developed. The objective of this work is to propose a methodology for Software Architecture Recovery, responding the specific needs of the context in which the need to recover the architecture of a software product is presented. Methods: The model was obtained after applying the pattern-matching technique in order to establish the common aspects to all the proposals identified in the literature review. Findings: The results of the evaluation of the methodological proposal reveal the usefulness when recovering architectures, since it allows focusing attention on the most relevant aspects of recovery for the specific context in which the process is performed. Novelty: The defined methodological proposal is a new way of performing architecture recovery processes, which achieves more relevant results to the context in which the needs arise.

References





DOI: https://doi.org/10.17485/ijst%2F2018%2Fv11i21%2F124487