The Community for Technology Leaders
RSS Icon
Issue No.02 - March/April (2009 vol.26)
pp: 80-87
Jingyue Li , Norwegian University of Science and Technology
Reidar Conradi , Norwegian University of Science and Technology
Christian Bunse , International University
Marco Torchiano , Politecnico di Torino
Odd Petter N. Slyngstad , Norwegian University of Science and Technology
Maurizio Morisio , Politecnico di Torino
Several empirical studies have been conducted on issues related to the development of systems using commercial off-the-shelf and open source software components. The results demonstrate a discrepancy between academic theory and industrial practices regarding the use of components. One reason is that researchers have empirically evaluated only a few theoretical methods; so, industrial practitioners have no reason to adopt them. Another reason might be that researchers have specified the application contexts of only a small number of theories in sufficient detail to avoid misleading users. Academic researchers often hold false assumptions about industry. For example, research on requirement negotiations often assumes that a client will be interested in, and be capable of, discussing a project's technical details. However, in practice this is usually not true. In addition, the quality of a component in the final system is often attributed solely to component quality before integration, ignoring quality improvements by integrators during component integration.
COTS-based development, OSS-based development, empirical studies
Jingyue Li, Reidar Conradi, Christian Bunse, Marco Torchiano, Odd Petter N. Slyngstad, Maurizio Morisio, "Development with Off-the-Shelf Components: 10 Facts", IEEE Software, vol.26, no. 2, pp. 80-87, March/April 2009, doi:10.1109/MS.2009.33
1. International Data Corp. "Application Development Software," 2007, www.idc.comgetdoc.jsp?containerId=IDC_P644 .
2. B. Boehm and C. Abts, "COTS Integration: Plug and Pray?" Computer, vol. 32, no. 1, 1999, pp. 135–138.
3. K.R.P.H. Leung and H.K.N. Leung, "On the Efficiency of Domain-Based COTS Product Selection Method," J. Information and Software Technology, vol. 44, no. 12, 2002, pp. 703–715.
4. J.S. Norris, "Mission-Critical Development with Open Source Software: Lessons Learned," IEEE Software, vol. 21, no. 1, 2004, pp. 2–9.
5. P.K. Lawlis et al., "A Formal Process for Evaluating COTS Software Products," Computer, vol. 34, no. 5, 2001, pp. 58–63.
6. M. Torchiano and M. Morisio, "Overlooked Facts on COTS-Based Development," IEEE Software, vol. 21, no. 2, 2004, pp. 88–93.
7. R.J. Kohl, "Requirements Engineering Changes for COTS-Intensive Systems," IEEE Software, vol. 22, no. 4, 2005, pp. 63–64.
8. C. Abts, B.W. Boehm, and E.B. Clark, "COCOTS: A COTS Software Integration Cost Model—Model Overview and Preliminary Data Findings," Proc. 11th European Software Control and Metrics Conf. (ESCOM), Shaker Publishing, 2000, pp. 325–333.
9. J.M. Voas, "Certifying Off-the-Shelf Software Components," Computer, vol. 31, no. 6, 1998, pp. 53–59.
10. Ø. Thomas et al., "Debugging Integrated Systems: An Ethnographic Study of Debugging Practice," Proc. 23rd Int'l Conf. Software Maintenance, IEEE Press 2007, pp. 305–314.
11. L.C. Rose, "Risk Management of COTS Based Systems Development," Component-Based Software Quality, LNCS 2693, Springer, 2003, pp. 353–373.
12. C. Ayala et al., "Open Source Collaboration for Fostering Off-the-Shelf Components Selection," Proc. 3rd Int'l Conf. Open Source Systems, Springer, 2007, pp 17–30.
23 ms
(Ver 2.0)

Marketing Automation Platform Marketing Automation Tool