Call for Paper - August 2019 Edition
IJCA solicits original research papers for the August 2019 Edition. Last date of manuscript submission is July 20, 2019. Read More

A Contrast and Comparison of Modern Software Process Models

Print
PDF
IJCA Proceedings on International Conference on Advances in Management and Technology 2013
© 2013 by IJCA Journal
iCAMT
Year of Publication: 2013
Authors:
Pankaj Vohra
Ashima Singh

Pankaj Vohra and Ashima Singh. Article: A Contrast and Comparison of Modern Software Process Models. IJCA Proceedings on International Conference on Advances in Management and Technology 2013 iCAMT:23-27, February 2013. Full text available. BibTeX

@article{key:article,
	author = {Pankaj Vohra and Ashima Singh},
	title = {Article: A Contrast and Comparison of Modern Software Process Models},
	journal = {IJCA Proceedings on International Conference on Advances in Management and Technology 2013},
	year = {2013},
	volume = {iCAMT},
	pages = {23-27},
	month = {February},
	note = {Full text available}
}

Abstract

Software Processes are the lifeline of any Software Development Model. Software Processes decide the survival of a particular software development model in the market as well as in software organization. The set of processes those proved to be effective and efficient for software development in one organization may or may not be followed in another organization. That is other organization finds another approach for software development more convenient to work with. This paper explains the progression and remarkable change in Software Processes and their respective models. It also summarizes a contrast of classical software processes with Agility and CBSE.

References

  • Boehm, B. 1988. A Spiral Model of Software Development and Enhancement. Computer, Vol. 21, 5 (5), May 1988, pp. 61-72.
  • Basili, V. R. & Reiter, R. 1981. A Controlled Experiment Quantitatively Comparing Software Development Approaches. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, Vol. 7, 3 (3), pp. 299-320.
  • Larman, C. & Basili, V. R. 2003. Iterative and Incremental Development: A Brief History. IEEE Software, Vol. 20, pp. 47-56.
  • Benington, H. D. 1983. Production of Large Computer Programs. Annals of the History of Computing, Vol. 5, 4 (4), October, pp. 350-361.
  • Royce, W. W. 1970. Managing the Development of Large Software Systems. In: The proceedings of the WESCON. San Francisco. IEEE CS. Pp. 328-339.
  • Lycett, M. , Macredie, R. D. , Patel, C. & Paul, R. J. 2003. Migrating Agile Methods to Standardized Development Practice. Computer, Vol. 36, 6 (6), June, pp. 79-85.
  • Larman, C. & Basili, V. R. 2003. Iterative and Incremental Development: A Brief History. IEEE Software, Vol. 20, pp. 47-56.
  • Larman, C. 2004. Agile and Iterative Development: A Manager's Guide. Pearson Education, Inc. Boston. 342 p.
  • Gilb, T. 1981. Evolutionary Development. ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes, Vol. 6, 2 (2). April, pp. 17.
  • Gilb, T. 1988. Principles of Software Engineering Management. Addison-Wesley. Wokingham, UK, 464 p.
  • Gilb, T. 2005. Competitive Engineering: A Handbook for Systems Engineering, Requirements Engineering, and Software Engineering Using Planguage. Butterworth-Heinemann. 480 p.
  • Agile Alliance Manifesto for Agile Software Development. 2001
  • Beck, K. 1999. Embracing Change with Extreme Programming. IEEE Computer, Vol. 32, 10 (10), pp. 70-77.
  • Beck, K. 2000. Extreme Programming Explained: Embrace Change. Addison Wesley Longman, Inc. 190 p.
  • Schwaber, K. 1995. Scrum Development Process. In: The proceedings of the OOPSLA'95 Workshop on Business Object Design and Implementation. Springer-Verlag. Pp. 117-134.
  • Williams, L. & Cockburn, A. 2003. Agile Software Development: It's about Feedback and Change. IEEE Computer Society, Vol. 36, 6 (6), June, pp. 39-43.
  • Highsmith, J. A. 2000. Adaptive Software Development: A Collaborative Approach to Managing Complex Systems. Dorset House Publishing. New York, NY. 358 p.
  • Jeffries, R. E. 1999. eXtreme Testing: Why Aggressive Software Development Calls for Radical Testing Efforts. Software Testing & Quality Engineering, Vol. March/April, pp. 23-26.
  • Cockburn, A. 1998. Surviving Object-Oriented Projects. Addison-Wesley. Reading, Mass. 250 p.
  • Stapleton, J. 2003. DSDM: Business Focused Development. Second Edition. Addison Wesley. London. 239 p.
  • Coad, P. , LeFebvre, E. & De Luca, J. 1999. Java Modeling In Color With UML: Enterprise Components and Process. Prentice Hall. 221 p.
  • Abrahamsson, P. , Salo, O. , Ronkainen, J. & Warsta, J. 2002. Agile Software Development Methods: Review and Analysis. VTT Publications 478. VTT Electronics. Espoo. 107 p. ISBN 951-38-6009-4; 951-38-6010-8.
  • Humphrey, W. S. 1995. A Discipline for Software Engineering. Addison Wesley Longman, Inc. 242 p.
  • Florac, W. A. , Carleton, A. D. & Barnard, J. R. 2000. Statistical Process Control: Analyzing a Space Shuttle Onboard Software Process. IEEE Software, Vol. 17, 4 (4). July–August, pp. 97-106.
  • Paulk, M. , Curtis, B. , Chrissis, M. & Weber, C. 1993. Capability Maturity Model for Software (Version 1. 1). CMU/SEI-93-TR-024. Software Engineering Institute (SEI). February. 65 p.
  • SEI, C. M. S. E. I. Capability Maturity Model® Integration (CMMISM), Version 1. 1. Carnegie Mellon Software Engineering Institute. 2001.
  • Bell Canada Trillium: Model for Telecom Product Development & Support Process Capability. Release 3. 0. Bell Canada. December, 1994. 118 p.
  • Kuvaja, P. & Bicego, A. 1993. Bootstrap: Europe's Assessment Method. IEEE Software, Vol. 10, 3 (3), May, pp. 93-95.
  • Pressman, R. S. , Software Engineering—A Practitioner's Approach, New York: McGrawHill International Ltd. , 2010. 847 p
  • Mili, Mili, Yacoub, Addy Edward, Reuse-Based Software Engineering, AWiley-Interscience Publication, John Wiley & Sons,INC. ,2002. 540 p.