| Abstract |
A 92 Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada 5 - 10 October 1992Addendum to the Proceedings Panel Report- The 00 SoftwareDevelopment Process Report by: Dennis de Champeaux HP-Labs Membersof the panel Dermis de Champeaux, HP-Lab, moderator Bob Balzer,Information Sciences Institute Dave Bulman, Pragmatics KathleenCulver-Lozo, AT&T Bell Laboratories Ivar Jacobson, ObjectoryStephen J. Mellor, Project Technology Pankaj Garg, HP-Lab,co-organizer of the panel Aim of the panel Improving developmentprocesses is a key issue for the software community in general. Theliterature gives us some guidance with respect to major activitiesof the development process. The waterfall, spiral and fountainmodel all agree upon distinctions such as: requirements capture,analysis, design, implementation, testing, maintenance. They alsoagree in that they do not provide a finer granularity of the insideactivities of analysis and design. We postulate that this omissionis a key inhibitor to a more widespread acceptance of the 00paradigm by project managers. They do not know how to plan anon-trivial 00 software development project. The purpose of thispanel was to take the first steps towards developing such processmodels. More 5-10 October 1992 -61- specifically the panelists havebeen asked to address the following questions (among others): . Canyou envision a generic OOA/ OOD development process? If so what arethe major steps and deliverables of these steps. If not, why not? lIf a software development organization had to choose between eitherdoing a paradigm shift to 00, or improving its rating on the SE1maturity scale what would you recommend? What are the relationshipsbetween the two? Qualify, if necessary, the answer with respect toan extant maturity level. It turned out that these, and the otherquestions, were quite hard for the panellists. Hence, we envision afollow on panel in the future where these topics will be raisedagain. In addition to this panel, I organized in 1992, workshops on00 process: one at ECOOP and one also at OOPSLA. All the events hadin common that the presenterslpanelists had hardly anything to sayabout process. The most tangible contributions were modestextensions of the standard macro process: requirements capture,analysis, design, implementation, test, maintenance, enhanced, ofcourse, by the recommendation to iterate. Addendum to theProceedings Hence, although the panel had lively exchanges, Irefrain from giving the details because I do not feel that thestate of the art was advanced. Instead I would like to point thereader to a report that proposes some details on the 00 analysisand design process: Dennis de Champeaux, Towards an 00 SWDevelopment Process, HP-Labs Tech Report HPL-92-149, November 1992.[The contributors Doug Lea, Penelope Faure, and Mohammed Fayadcould not be listed as authors for legal reasons.] For a copycontact: HP-Labs/ Technical Publications Dept./ 1501 Page Mill RdPalo Alto, CA 94304 (415) 857 4573 OOPSLA92 -62 - Vancouver,British Columbia |
