Multi-variant Model Transformations — A Problem Statement

Felix Schwägerl, Thomas Buchmann, Bernhard Westfechtel

2016

Abstract

Model Transformations are a key element of Model-Driven Software Engineering. As soon as variability is involved, transformations become increasingly complicated. The lack of support for variability in model transformations impairs the acceptance of approaches to organized reuse such as software product lines. In this position paper, the general problem of multi-variant model transformations is formulated for MOF-based, XMI-serialized models. A simplistic case study is presented to specify the input and the expected output of such a transformation. Furthermore, requirements for tool support are defined, including a standardized representation of both multi-variant model instances and variability information, as well as an execution specification for multi-variant transformations. A literature review reveals that the problem is weakly identified and often solved using ad-hoc solutions; there exists no tool providing a general solution to the proposed problem statement. The observations presented here may serve for the future development of standards and tools.

References

  1. Altmanninger, K., Seidl, M., and Wimmer, M. (2009). A survey on model versioning approaches. International Journal of Web Information Systems (IJWIS), 5(3):271-304.
  2. Buchmann, T. and Schwägerl, F. (2015a). Developing heterogeneous software product lines with famile - a model-driven approach. International Journal on Advances in Software, 8(1 & 2):232 - 246.
  3. Buchmann, T. and Schwägerl, F. (2015b). On A-posteriori Integration of Ecore Models and Hand-written Java Code. In Pascal Lorenz, M. v. S. and Cardoso, J., editors, Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Software Paradigm Trends, pages 95-102. SCITEPRESS.
  4. Czarnecki, K. and Kim, C. H. P. (2005). Cardinality-based feature modeling and constraints: a progress report. In International Workshop on Software Factories at OOPSLA'05, San Diego, California, USA. ACM.
  5. Gomaa, H. (2004). Designing Software Product Lines with UML: From Use Cases to Pattern-Based Software Architectures. Addison-Wesley, Boston, MA.
  6. Haugen, O., Møller-Pedersen, B., Oldevik, J., Olsen, G. K., and Svendsen, A. (2008). Adding standardized variability to domain specific languages. In Proceedings of the 2008 12th International Software Product Line Conference, SPLC 7808, pages 139-148, Washington, DC, USA. IEEE Computer Society.
  7. Heidenreich, F., Kopcsek, J., and Wende, C. (2008). FeatureMapper: Mapping features to models. In Companion Proceedings of the 30th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE'08), pages 943-944, Leipzig, Germany.
  8. Jouault, F. and Kurtev, I. (2006). Transforming models with atl. In Proceedings of the 2005 International Conference on Satellite Events at the MoDELS, MoDELS'05, pages 128-138, Berlin, Heidelberg. Springer-Verlag.
  9. Kang, K. C., Cohen, S. G., Hess, J. A., Novak, W. E., and Peterson, A. S. (1990). Feature-oriented domain analysis (FODA) feasibility study. Technical Report CMU/SEI-90-TR-21, Carnegie-Mellon University, Software Engineering Institute.
  10. Lopez-Herrejon, R. E. and Batory, D. S. (2001). A standard problem for evaluating product-line methodologies. In Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Generative and Component-Based Software Engineering, GCSE 7801, pages 10-24, London, UK. Springer.
  11. Mellor, S. J., Kendall, S., Uhl, A., and Weise, D. (2004). MDA Distilled. Addison Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc., Redwood City, CA, USA.
  12. OMG (2011a). Meta Object Facility (MOF) 2.0 Query/View/Transformation Specification, Version 1.1. Object Management Group, Needham, MA.
  13. OMG (2011b). Meta Object Facility (MOF) Core. Object Management Group, Needham, MA.
  14. OMG (2011c). OMG MOF 2 XMI Mapping Specification, Version 2.4.1. Object Management Group, Needham, MA.
  15. OMG (2011d). UML Infrastructure. Object Management Group, Needham, MA.
  16. OMG (2012a). Common Variability Language (CVL) OMG Revised Submission. Object Management Group, Needham, MA.
  17. OMG (2012b). MOF Model to Text Transformation Language, Version 1.0. Object Management Group, Needham, MA.
  18. OMG (2014). Object Constraint Language (OCL). Object Management Group, Needham, MA.
  19. Pohl, K., Böckle, G., and van der Linden, F. (2005). Software Product Line Engineering: Foundations, Principles and Techniques. Berlin, Germany.
  20. Salay, R., Famelis, M., Rubin, J., Sandro, A. D., and Chechik, M. (2014). Lifting model transformations to product lines. In 36th International Conference on Software Engineering, ICSE 7814, Hyderabad, India - May 31 - June 07, 2014, pages 117-128.
  21. Schwägerl, F., Uhrig, S., and Westfechtel, B. (2015). A graph-based algorithm for three-way merging of ordered collections in EMF models. Science of Computer Programming, 113, Part 1:51 - 81. Selected and Revised Papers from MODELSWARD 2014.
  22. Steinberg, D., Budinsky, F., Paternostro, M., and Merks, E. (2009). EMF Eclipse Modeling Framework. The Eclipse Series. Boston, MA, 2nd edition.
  23. Taentzer, G., Ermel, C., Langer, P., and Wimmer, M. (2014). A fundamental approach to model versioning based on graph modifications: From theory to implementation. Software & Systems Modeling, 13(1):239- 272.
  24. Völter, M. and Groher, I. (2007). Handling variability in model transformations and generators. In Companion to the Annual ACM SIGPLAN Conference on ObjectOriented Programming, Systems, Languages, and Applications (OOPSLA 2007). ACM.
  25. Völter, M., Stahl, T., Bettin, J., Haase, A., and Helsen, S. (2006). Model-Driven Software Development: Technology, Engineering, Management. John Wiley & Sons.
  26. Westfechtel, B. and Conradi, R. (2009). Multi-variant modeling - concepts, issues and challenges. In Mezini, M., Beuche, D., and Moreira, A., editors, Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Model-Driven Product Line Engineering (MDPLE 2009), pages 57- 67. CTIT Proceedings.
  27. Zeller, A. and Snelting, G. (1997). Unified versioning through feature logic. ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol., 6(4):398-441.
  28. Zschaler, S., Sánchez, P., Santos, J., Alférez, M., Rashid, A., Fuentes, L., Moreira, A., Araújo, J., and Kulesza, U. (2010). VML* - A Family of Languages for Variability Management in Software Product Lines. In van den Brand, M., Gaevic, D., and Gray, J., editors, Software Language Engineering, volume 5969 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 82-102. Springer Berlin / Heidelberg, Denver, CO, USA.
Download


Paper Citation


in Harvard Style

Schwägerl F., Buchmann T. and Westfechtel B. (2016). Multi-variant Model Transformations — A Problem Statement . In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Evaluation of Novel Software Approaches to Software Engineering - Volume 1: ENASE, ISBN 978-989-758-189-2, pages 203-209. DOI: 10.5220/0005878702030209


in Bibtex Style

@conference{enase16,
author={Felix Schwägerl and Thomas Buchmann and Bernhard Westfechtel},
title={Multi-variant Model Transformations — A Problem Statement},
booktitle={Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Evaluation of Novel Software Approaches to Software Engineering - Volume 1: ENASE,},
year={2016},
pages={203-209},
publisher={SciTePress},
organization={INSTICC},
doi={10.5220/0005878702030209},
isbn={978-989-758-189-2},
}


in EndNote Style

TY - CONF
JO - Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Evaluation of Novel Software Approaches to Software Engineering - Volume 1: ENASE,
TI - Multi-variant Model Transformations — A Problem Statement
SN - 978-989-758-189-2
AU - Schwägerl F.
AU - Buchmann T.
AU - Westfechtel B.
PY - 2016
SP - 203
EP - 209
DO - 10.5220/0005878702030209