Architectural uncertainties arising from incomplete or unclear information pose significant challenges when making architectural decisions in Agile teams. Based on a limited number of case studies that employed a technique called ArchHypo, four patterns were identified that propose small adjustments in the development process to handle architectural uncertainties: Protective Guideline, Bring the Specialist, Plan for Preparation, and Quality Checkpoint. Although the patterns derived from these experiences can be useful in real projects, their applicability and consequences were based on limited evidence and specific scenarios. To address this issue, this paper presents an interview study with experienced software architects and engineers to gather further information on the application of these patterns. The research method employed semi-structured interviews to gather the experiences of professionals with the target practices, and thematic analysis was used to assess their recurrence, applicability, and consequences. The findings confirmed that most professionals recognized those practices in real projects and their suitability as actions in uncertainty management. Moreover, new positive and negative consequences, not previously documented in the patterns, were identified. As a result, this work contributes to the field by providing guidance to professionals on how to better evaluate the trade-offs of those patterns when applied to architecture uncertainty management.

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

Evaluating the Consequences of Process Adjustment Patterns for Handling Software Architecture Uncertainties

  • André Paris,
  • Fábio Fagundes Silveira,
  • Jorge Melegati,
  • Eduardo Guerra

摘要

Architectural uncertainties arising from incomplete or unclear information pose significant challenges when making architectural decisions in Agile teams. Based on a limited number of case studies that employed a technique called ArchHypo, four patterns were identified that propose small adjustments in the development process to handle architectural uncertainties: Protective Guideline, Bring the Specialist, Plan for Preparation, and Quality Checkpoint. Although the patterns derived from these experiences can be useful in real projects, their applicability and consequences were based on limited evidence and specific scenarios. To address this issue, this paper presents an interview study with experienced software architects and engineers to gather further information on the application of these patterns. The research method employed semi-structured interviews to gather the experiences of professionals with the target practices, and thematic analysis was used to assess their recurrence, applicability, and consequences. The findings confirmed that most professionals recognized those practices in real projects and their suitability as actions in uncertainty management. Moreover, new positive and negative consequences, not previously documented in the patterns, were identified. As a result, this work contributes to the field by providing guidance to professionals on how to better evaluate the trade-offs of those patterns when applied to architecture uncertainty management.