Assessment of Three Evaluation Methods for Object-Oriented Framework Evolution

Object-oriented framework technology has become a common reuse technology in object-oriented software development. As with all software, frameworks tend to evolve. Once the framework has been deployed, new versions of a framework cause high maintenance cost for the products built with the framework. This fact in combination with the high costs of developing and evolving an object-oriented framework make it important to have controlled and predictable evolution of the framework?s functionality and costs. We present three methods 1) Evolution Identification Using Historical Information, 2) Stability Assessment and 3) Distribution of Development Effort which have been applied to between one to three different frameworks, both in the proprietary and commercial domain. The methods provide management with information which will make it possible to make well-informed decisions about the framework?s evolution, especially with respect to the following issues; identification of evolution-prone modules, framework deployment, change impact analysis, benchmarking and requirements management. Finally, the methods are compared to each other with respect to costs and benefits.

[1]  Andreas Rösel Experiences with the Evolution of an Application Family Architecture , 1998, ESPRIT ARES Workshop.

[2]  Lennart Ohlsson,et al.  Points & Deviations : A Pattern Language for Fire Alarm Systems , 1996 .

[3]  Michael Mattsson Effort distribution in a six year industrial application framework project , 1999, Proceedings IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance - 1999 (ICSM'99). 'Software Maintenance for Business Change' (Cat. No.99CB36360).

[4]  Jan Bosch,et al.  Characterizing stability in evolving frameworks , 1999, Proceedings Technology of Object-Oriented Languages and Systems. TOOLS 29 (Cat. No.PR00275).

[5]  Chris F. Kemerer,et al.  A Metrics Suite for Object Oriented Design , 2015, IEEE Trans. Software Eng..

[6]  Glenn Andert Object frameworks in the Taligent OS , 1994, Proceedings of COMPCON '94.

[7]  Bedir Tekinerdogan,et al.  Building Application Frameworks: Object-Oriented Foundations of Framework Design (M. Fayad, D. Schmidt, R. Johnson (eds.) , 1999 .

[8]  Mikael Lindvall,et al.  How well do experienced software developers predict software change? , 1998, J. Syst. Softw..

[9]  Michael Mattsson,et al.  Object-Oriented Frameworks : A Survey of Methodological Issues , 1996 .

[10]  Jan Bosch,et al.  Observations on the evolution of an industrial OO framework , 1999, Proceedings IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance - 1999 (ICSM'99). 'Software Maintenance for Business Change' (Cat. No.99CB36360).

[11]  Carl G. Davis,et al.  A hierarchical model for quality assessment of object-oriented designs , 1997 .

[12]  Sallie M. Henry,et al.  Object-oriented metrics that predict maintainability , 1993, J. Syst. Softw..

[13]  Harald C. Gall,et al.  Software evolution observations based on product release history , 1997, 1997 Proceedings International Conference on Software Maintenance.

[14]  Claus Lewerentz,et al.  Applying design-metrics to object-oriented frameworks , 1996, Proceedings of the 3rd International Software Metrics Symposium.

[15]  Oscar Nierstrasz,et al.  The Effect of Object-Oriented Frameworks on Developer Productivity , 1996, Computer.

[16]  Kevin Benner,et al.  Managing Object-Oriented Framework Reuse , 1996, Computer.

[17]  Ralph Johnson,et al.  A framework for network protocol software , 1995, OOPSLA.

[18]  Jan Bosch,et al.  Stability assessment of evolving industrial object-oriented frameworks , 2000, J. Softw. Maintenance Res. Pract..