DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

An Adjustable Process of Requirements Prioritizing for Release Plan

릴리즈 플랜의 적응적 요구사항 우선순위 프로세스

  • 성재석 (고려대학교 컴퓨터.전파통신공학과) ;
  • 강동수 (고려대학교 컴퓨터.전파통신공학과) ;
  • 송치양 (경북대학교 소프트웨어공학과) ;
  • 백두권 (고려대학교 컴퓨터.전파통신공학과)
  • Published : 2008.12.31

Abstract

The priority of requirement is important because the priority is a critical activity of release plan especially in software development which has an open market customer. Also, it is important for stakeholders to select a method and aspects to prioritize requirements. The selection is based on the organizational experience of a priority process, the process model of the product, goals and a type of products, and dependencies between requirements. But, the current researches considered only static dependency between requirements and did not suggest a systematic priority process. In addition, the current researches only suggest limited aspects to prioritize requirements, such as cost and value. Therefore, this paper proposes an adjustable priority process based on a priority model to select a method and aspects for the suitable priority for product and organization. Especially, this paper enhances the completeness of a release plan by a definition of static and dynamic dependency types between requirements. This paper suggests a priority model, which considers the dependencies between requirement and various viewpoint of software development. Based on the priority model, the paper suggests a systematic priority process to promote reasonable decisions to the priority and release plan of requirement.

요구사항에 대한 우선순위는 릴리즈 플랜을 위한 핵심적 활동이기 때문에 요구공학에서 특히, 오픈 시장(Open Market)을 고객으로 하는 시장 주도형 제품개발에 있어서 중요하다. 또한, 요구사항 우선순위는 주어진 요구사항 간의 상호의존 관계를 바탕으로 프로세스 모델, 제품 종류 및 우선순위 프로세스에 대한 경험 등을 사전에 고려하여 우선순위화를 위한 방법과 관점 등을 선택하는 활동이 중요하다. 그러나, 기존 연구들은 요구사항간의 상호의존 관계를 정적 관계만 고려하였고, 고려된 관점들이 비용/가치 등으로 한정적이고 체계적인 우선순위 프로세스를 제공치 못하고 있다. 따라서 본 논문에서는 우선순위화를 위한 모델을 설계하고 개발 제품의 목표와 조직에 적합하도록 우선순위 방법과 관점 등을 선택할 수 있는 적응적 요구사항 우선순위 기법 및 프로세스를 제안한다. 특히, 요구사항간의 정적/동적 상호의존 관계 유형을 정의하고, 다양한 관점에 의한 우선순위화를 통해 릴리즈 플랜의 완성도를 높였다. 이로써 상호의존 관계 및 다양한 관점을 고려한 우선순위 모델기반의 체계적인 우선순위 프로세스를 정립하여 유연하고 충족스러운 우선순위화와 릴리즈 플랜을 통하여 합리적으로 의사결정을 도모할 수 있다.

Keywords

References

  1. M Khurum, K Aslam, T Gorschek, “A Method for Early Requirements Triage and Selection Utilizing Product Strategies,” Software Engineering Conference 2007, APSEC 2007. 14th Asia-Pacific, pp.97-104, 4-7 Dec., 2007 https://doi.org/10.1109/APSEC.2007.8
  2. Firesmith, D. G., “Prioritizing Requirements,” Journal of Object Technology (JOT), 3(8),Swiss Federal Institute of Technology(ETH), Zurich, Switzerland, pp.35-47, September/ October, 2004 https://doi.org/10.5381/jot.2004.3.8.c4
  3. Joachkim Karlsson, Claes Wohlin, Bjorn Regnell, “An Evaluation of methods for prioritizing software requirements,” Information and Software Technology, 39(14-15), pp.939-947, 1998 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0950-5849(97)00053-0
  4. Berander, P. and Andrews, A., “Requirements Prioritization,” in Engineering and Managing Software Requirements, ed. Aurum, A., and Wohlin, C., Springer Verlag, Berlin, Germany, pp.69-94, 2005 https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-28244-0_4
  5. Carlshamre P, Sandahl K, Lindvall M, Regnell B, Natt och Dag J., “An industrial survey of requirements interdependencies in software Release Planning,” Proceedings of the 5th IEEE international symposium on requirements engineering, pp.84-91, 2001 https://doi.org/10.1109/ISRE.2001.948547
  6. Karlsson, J., and Ryan, K. “A Cost-Value Approach for Prioritizing Requirements,”IEEE Software 14(5), pp.67-74, 1997 https://doi.org/10.1109/52.605933
  7. Karl E. Wiegers, Software Requirements, second edition, pp.247-258, Microsoft Press, 2003
  8. Berander P, “Using students as subjects in requirements prioritization,” Proceedings of the 2004 International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering(ISESE'04), IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos, pp.167-176, 2004 https://doi.org/10.1109/ISESE.2004.1334904
  9. K. Beck, “Extreme Programming Explained: Embrace Change,” Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass., 2000
  10. Penny D. A., “An Estimation-Based Management Framework for Enhancive Maintenance in Commercial Software Products,” In Proceedings of International Conference on Software Maintenance (ICSM), pp.122-130, 2002 https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSM.2002.1167759
  11. Denne, M. and Cleland-Huang, J., “The Incremental Funding Method: Data Driven Software Development,” 21(3), pp.39-47, 2004 https://doi.org/10.1109/MS.2004.1293071
  12. Ruhe, G., Saliu, M. O., “The Science and Practice of Software Release Planning,” IEEE Software, 2005
  13. Greer, D., and Ruhe, G., “Software Release Planning: an Evolutionary and Iterative Approach,” Information and Software Technology, 46(4), pp.243-253, 2004 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2003.07.002
  14. Saliu O, Ruhe G., “Supporting software Release Planning decisions for evolving systems,” Proceedings of 29thIEEE/ NASA software engineering workshop, Greenbelt, MD, USA, 6-7 April, 2005 https://doi.org/10.1109/SEW.2005.42
  15. Carlshamre P, Sandahl K, Lindvall M, Regnell B, Natt och Dag J. “An industrial survey of requirements interdependencies in software Release Planning,” Proceedings of the 5th IEEE international symposium on requirements engineering, pp.84-91, 2001
  16. B. Regnell and S. Brinkkemper, “Market-Driven Requirements Engineering for Software Products,” Engineering and Managing Software Requirements, A. Aurum and C., Wohlin (eds.), Berlin, Germany, Springer Verlag, pp.287-308, 2005 https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-28244-0_13
  17. Jacobson, I., Booch, G., Rumbaugh, J., The Unified Software Development Process, pp.94-98, Addison Wesley, Object Technology Series, 1999
  18. G. Ruhe and M.O. Saliu, “The Art and Science of Software Release Planning,” IEEE Softare. 22(6), pp.47-53. 2005 https://doi.org/10.1109/MS.2005.164
  19. IEEE Std 830-1998, IEEE recommended practice for software requirements specifications.,IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos, 1998
  20. WeiZhang, Hong Mei, Haiyan Zhao, “A Feature-Oriented Approach to Modeling Requirements Dependencies,” Proceedings of the 2005 13th IEEE International Conference on Requirements Engineering(RE'05), 2005 https://doi.org/10.1109/RE.2005.6
  21. W. N. Robinson, “Requirements Interaction Management,” ACM Computing Surveys, Vol.35, No.2, pp.132-190, June, 2003 https://doi.org/10.1145/857076.857079
  22. Y. Lee, C. Yang, C. Zhu, and W. Zhao. “An Approach to Managing Feature Dependencies for Product Releasing in Software Product Line,” Proceeding of the 9th International Conference on Software Reuse: Reuse of Offthe- Shelf Components (ICSR 2006), pp.27-141, Turin, Italy, June, 12-15, 2006
  23. A.G. Dahlstedt, A. Persson, “Requirements Interdependencies- Moulding the State of Research Into a Research Agenda,” Proceedings of Ninth International Workshop on Requirements Engineering: Foundation for Software Quality, Klagenfurt/Velden, Austria, pp.55-64. June, 2003
  24. W. Zhang, H. Mei, and H. Zhao. “Feature-driven requirement dependency analysis and high-level software design,” Requir. Eng., 11(3):205-220, 2006 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00766-006-0033-x
  25. A.G. Dahlstedt, A. Persson, “Requirements Interdependencies: State of the Art and Future Challenges,” Engineering and Managing Software Requirements, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, pp.95-116, 2005 https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-28244-0_5
  26. Karl E. Wiegers, “Karl Wiegers Describes 10 Requirements Traps to Avoid,” Software Testing & Quality Engineering, January/February, 2000
  27. Dahlstedt, A. G., Karlsson, L., Persson, A., Natt och Dag, J. and Regnell, B., “Market-Driven Requirements Engineering Processes for Software Products -a Report on Current Practices,” Submitted to Development of Product Software, DoPS-03, Velden, Austria., 20 and 21 June, 2003
  28. 성 재석, 강동수, 송치양, 백두권, “요구사항 우선순위 프로세스 설계”, 한국정보과학회 학술발표논문집, 한국정보과학회 2008 종합학술대회 논문집, 제35권 제1호(B), pp.13-18, 2008
  29. Robertson, S. & Robertson, J. Mastering the Requirements Process. 2nd Ed., p.333, Addison-Wesley,1999
  30. C. Turner, A. Fuggetta, L. Lavazza, A. Wolf, “A Conceptual basis for Feature engineering,”J. Syst. Software. 49 pp.3-15, 1999 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0164-1212(99)00062-X
  31. Dean Leffingwell, Don Widrig, Managing Software Requirements ; A Use Case Approach, Second Edition, pp. 10-11, pp.95-100, pp.50, Addison Wesley, 2003
  32. K. Kang et al., “Feature-Oriented Domain Analysis(FODA) Feasibility Study,” tech. report CMU/SEI-90-TR-21, Software Eng. Inst., Carnegie Mellon Univ., Pittsburgh, 1990
  33. K.C.Kang, S.J.Kim, J.J.Lee, K.J.Kim, E.Shin, “ FORM: A Feature-Oriented Reuse Method with Domain-Specific Reference,” Architectures; Annals of Software Engineering, Vol.5, 1998 https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1018980625587
  34. J. Momoh, G. Ruhe: “Release Planning process improvement - an industrial case study,” In: “Software Process: Improvement and Practice,” Vol.11, Issue3, pp.295-307, 2006 https://doi.org/10.1002/spip.273
  35. Frank Moisiadis, “The fundamental of Prioritizing Requirements, System Engineering,” Test & Evaluation Conference, 2002
  36. 성재석, 강동수, 송치양, 안상선, 백두권, “적응적 요구사항 우선순위 기법”, 한국정보처리학회 학술발표논문집, 제30회 한국정보처리학회 추계학술발표대회, 제15권 제2호, pp.462-465, 2008
  37. P. Berander, K. A. Khan, and L. Lehtola, “Towards a Research Framework on Requirements Prioritization,” SERPS 06, Umea, Sweden, 2006
  38. Karlsson, L., Host, M., Regnell, B., “Evaluating the practical use of different measurement scales in requirements prioritization,” In: ISESE 2006. Proceedings of the 2006 ACM/IEEE international Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering, pp.326-335. ACM Press, New York, 2006 https://doi.org/10.1145/1159733.1159782
  39. Karlsson, J., Olsson, S. and Ryan, K., “Improved Practical Support for Large-scale Requirements Prioritization,” Requirements Engineering Journal, 2(1), p.51-60, 1997 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02802897
  40. Lehtola, L., and Kauppinen, M. “Empirical Evaluation of Two Requirements Prioritization Methods in Product Development Projects,” Proceedings of the European Software Process Improvement Conference (EuroSPI 2004), Trondheim, Norway, pp.161-170, 2004
  41. Karlsson, J. “Software Requirements Prioritizing,” Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Requirements Engineering (ICRE'96), Colorado Springs, CO, pp.110-116, 1996
  42. Karlsson, L., Thelin, T., Regnell, B., Berander, P., and Wohlin, C., “Pair-Wise Comparisons versus Planning Game Partitioning - Experiments on Requirements Prioritisation Techniques,” Journal of Empirical Software Engineering, Vol 1.11 Nr2, 2006
  43. Ahl, Viggo. “An Experimental Comparison of Five Prioritization Techniques - Investigating Ease of Use, Accuracy, and Scalability,” Master Thesis No. MSE-2005-11, School of Engineering, Blekinge Institute of Technology, 2005
  44. A. I. Anton, “Goal-Based Requirements Analysis,” Proceedings of ICRE'96, pp.136-144, 1996
  45. A. Lamsweerde, “Goal-Oriented Requirements Engineering: A Guided Tour,” 5th International Symposium on Requirements Engineering, IEEE Computer Society Press, pp.249-261, 2001 https://doi.org/10.1109/ISRE.2001.948567
  46. WATTS S. HUMPHREY, “Why Does Software Work Take So Long?,” SEI Interactive, June, 1998

Cited by

  1. A Requirement Priority Process of Embedded Systems based on the Dependency and Aspect vol.16D, pp.5, 2009, https://doi.org/10.3745/KIPSTD.2009.16D.5.767