TY - GEN
T1 - Quick evaluation of a software architecture using the decision-centric architecture review method
T2 - 14th European Conference on Software Architecture, ECSA 2020
AU - Cruz, Pablo
AU - Salinas, Luis
AU - Astudillo, Hernán
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020.
PY - 2020
Y1 - 2020
N2 - Software architecture evaluations allow systematic checking of software architecture fitness regarding the context and business. However, selecting and using an evaluation method always have some challenges and issues. This article reports an architecture review while developing an innovation projects support platform for a Chilean R&D and engineering institution. We chose DCAR (Decision-Centric Architecture Review) because it has lightweight requirements on documentation and resources, it can evaluate a project already running, and it did not impact a schedule where architecture reviews had not been considered from the start. We describe the review of three accepted and one rejected decisions. Lessons learned and benefits observed include recording decisions’ rationale, visibilization of some technological issues, and rethinking of some previously made architectural decisions. Finally, we recommend making frequent mini-reviews of architecture decisions, to understand the architecture, formalize it with its resulting reports, and raise its visibility in the team itself.
AB - Software architecture evaluations allow systematic checking of software architecture fitness regarding the context and business. However, selecting and using an evaluation method always have some challenges and issues. This article reports an architecture review while developing an innovation projects support platform for a Chilean R&D and engineering institution. We chose DCAR (Decision-Centric Architecture Review) because it has lightweight requirements on documentation and resources, it can evaluate a project already running, and it did not impact a schedule where architecture reviews had not been considered from the start. We describe the review of three accepted and one rejected decisions. Lessons learned and benefits observed include recording decisions’ rationale, visibilization of some technological issues, and rethinking of some previously made architectural decisions. Finally, we recommend making frequent mini-reviews of architecture decisions, to understand the architecture, formalize it with its resulting reports, and raise its visibility in the team itself.
KW - Architecture decisions
KW - Architecture evaluation
KW - Software architecture
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85091515658&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/978-3-030-58923-3_19
DO - 10.1007/978-3-030-58923-3_19
M3 - Conference contribution
AN - SCOPUS:85091515658
SN - 9783030589226
T3 - Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics)
SP - 281
EP - 295
BT - Software Architecture - 14th European Conference, ECSA 2020, Proceedings
A2 - Jansen, Anton
A2 - Malavolta, Ivano
A2 - Muccini, Henry
A2 - Ozkaya, Ipek
A2 - Zimmermann, Olaf
PB - Springer Science and Business Media Deutschland GmbH
Y2 - 14 September 2020 through 18 September 2020
ER -