KSII Transactions on Internet and Information Systems (TIIS)

Korean Society for Internet Information (한국인터넷정보학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Towards Enacting a SPEM-based Test Process with Maturity Levels

  • Received : 2016.09.20
  • Accepted : 2017.02.27
  • Published : 2017.02.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Effective monitoring and testing during each step are essential for document verification in research and development (R&D) projects. In software development, proper testing is required to verify it carefully and constantly because of the invisibility features of software. However, not enough studies on test processes for R&D projects have been done. Thus, in this paper, we introduce a Test Maturity Model integration (TMMi)-based software field R&D test process that offers five integrity levels and makes the process compatible for different types of projects. The Software & Systems Process Engineering Metamodel (SPEM) is used widely in the software process-modeling context, but it lacks built-in enactment capabilities, so there is no tool or process engine that enables one to execute the process models described in SPEM. Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN)-based workflow engines can be a solution for process execution, but process models described in SPEM need to be converted to BPMN models. Thus, we propose an approach to support enactment of SPEM-based process models by converting them into business processes. We show the effectiveness of our approach through converting software R&D test processes specified in SPEM in a case study.

Keywords

References

  1. G. J. Myers, T. Badgett and C. Sandler, "The Art of Software Testing, Third Edition," John Wiley & Sons Inc, 2015.
  2. D. S. Baek, B. J. Lee and J. W. Lee, "Content-based Configuration Management System for Software Research and Development Document Artifacts," KSII Transactions on Internet & Information Systems, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 1404-1415, 2016. https://doi.org/10.3837/tiis.2016.03.027
  3. D. S. Baek, J. H. Shin, B. J. Lee and J. W. Lee, "Towards Development of a Traceability Model Measuring Compliance with Guidelines," in Proc. of the 11th Asia Pacific International Conference on Information Science and Technology, pp. 37-38, 2016.
  4. A. Dashbalbar, E. C. Lee, J. W. Lee and B. J. Lee, "Describing Activities to Verify Artifacts (Documents and Program) in Software R&D," Journal of Internet Computing and Services, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 39-47, 2016. https://doi.org/10.7472/jksii.2016.17.2.39
  5. S. M. Song, A. Dashbalbar, J. W. Lee and B. J. Lee, "Test Framework Requirements to Verify Artifacts in Software R&D Project," International Journal of Software Engineering and Its Applications, vol. 10, no. 11, pp. 83-94, 2016.
  6. OMG, "Software & Systems Process Engineering Metamodel Specification, Version 2.0," Object Management Group(OMG), 2008.
  7. OMG, "Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN)," Object Management Group(OMG), 2011.
  8. A. Dashbalbar, S. M. Song, J. W. Lee and B. J. Lee, "Enacting Test Process by mapping from SPEM to BPMN," in Proc. of the 11th Asia Pacific International Conference on Information Science and Technology, pp. 223-225, 2016.
  9. B. Elvesaeter, G. Benguria and S. Ilieva, "A comparison of the Essence 1.0 and SPEM 2.0 specifications for software engineering methods," in Proc. of the Third Workshop on Process-Based Approaches for Model-Driven Engineering, no. 2, p. 2, 2013.
  10. E. Veenendaal, "Test maturity model integration (TMMi)," TMMi Foundation, 2008.
  11. E. Veenendaal, R. Grooff and R. Hendriks, "Test Process Improvement using TMM(i)," Testing Experience: The Magazine for Professional Testers, vol. 3, no. 19, pp. 21-25, 2008.
  12. I. Burnstein, A. Homyen, R. Grom, and C.R. Carlson, "A model to assess testing process maturity," Crosstalk The Journal of Defense Software Engineering, vol. 11, no. 11, pp. 26-30, 1998.
  13. I. Burnstein, S. Taratip, and C. Robert, "Developing a testing maturity model for software test process evaluation and improvement," in Proc. of Test Conference. International, pp. 581-589, 1996.
  14. T. Ericson, A. Subotic, and S. Ursing, "TIM - A Test Improvement Model," Software Testing Verification and Reliability, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 229-246, 1997. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1689(199712)7:4<229::AID-STVR149>3.0.CO;2-M
  15. N. Debnath, F. A. Zorzan, G. Montejano and D. Riesco, "Transformation of BPMN subprocesses based in SPEM using QVT," in Proc. of 2007 IEEE International Conference on Electro/Information Technology, 2007.
  16. C. Portela, A. Vasconcelos, A. Silva, A. Sinimbu, E. Silva, M. Ronny, W. Lira and S. Oliveira, "A Comparative Analysis between BPMN and SPEM Modeling Standards in the Software Processes Context," Journal of Software Engineering and Applications, vol. 5, no. 5, pp. 330-339, 2012. https://doi.org/10.4236/jsea.2012.55039
  17. "ISO/IEC/IEEE 29119 Software Testing Standard," International Organization for Standardization, 2013.
  18. R. Rakitin, "Software verification and validation for practitioners and managers," Artech House Inc., 2001.
  19. K. Georg, and M. Kuhrmann, "Criteria for software process tailoring: a systematic review," in Proc. of the 2013 International Conference on Software and System Process. ACM, 2013.
  20. D. S. Beak, B. J. Lee and J. W. Lee, "Relevance Analysis System Design based on Content of Software Research and Development Document Artifacts," In Proc. of the 10th Asia Pacific International Conference on Information Science and Technology, pp. 125-126, 2015.
  21. P, Haumer, "Eclipse process framework composer," Eclipse Foundation, 2007.
  22. "jBPM 6.3 Documentation," JBoss, 2015.
  23. E. Veenendaal, "TMMi and ISO/IEC 29119: Friends or Foes?," TMMi Foundation, 2016.

Cited by

  1. Improving Fault Traceability of Web Application by Utilizing Software Revision Information and Behavior Model vol.12, pp.2, 2018, https://doi.org/10.3837/tiis.2018.02.016
  2. Supporting Systematic Software Test Process in R&D Project with Behavioral Models vol.19, pp.2, 2017, https://doi.org/10.7472/jksii.2018.19.2.43