Critical Code Software Producibility for Defense (2010) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Summary
Summary
Pages 1-16
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 1... ...
This report contemplates Department of Defense needs and priorities (Chapter 1) for software producibility -- that is, the capacity to design, produce, assure, and evolve innovative software-intensive systems in a predict able manner while effectively managing risk, cost, schedule, and complexity.
|
From page 2... ...
8. Earned value management approaches based on code accumulation are a sufficient basis for managing software development programs, including incremental iterative development.
|
From page 3... ...
A key question addressed by the committee is to what extent the DoD, without providing any explicit R&D stimulus, can rely on industry -- specifically the domestic defense industrial base and supporting vendors -- to produce software innovations in areas of defense significance at a rate fast enough to allow the DoD to fully meet software requirements and remain ahead of potential adversaries. Finding the answer to this question is made more urgent by the expected continued rapid evolution of software capability worldwide.
|
From page 4... ...
8 Finding 2-1: Modern practice for innovative software systems at all levels of scale is geared toward incremental identification and mitigation of engineering uncertainties, including requirements uncertainties. For defense software, the challenge is doing so at a larger scale and in ways that are closely linked with an overall systems engineering process.
|
From page 5... ...
Recommendation 2-2: The DoD should take steps to accumulate high-quality data regarding project management experience and technology choices that can be used to inform cost estimation models, particularly as they apply to innovative software development projects. It is widely acknowledged, including within the DoD, that the department does not have sufficient organic personnel with the software expertise to meet its needs for today's more software-intensive programs.
|
From page 6... ...
Although having a well-matched architecture is not a guarantee of success, software systems that are not based on well-formulated software architectures are, in the committee's view, more likely to exhibit the kind of software horror stories too often experienced in DoD acquisitions with respect to project risk. Finding 3-5: In systems with innovative functional or quality requirements, benefit is derived from an early focus on the most essential architectural commitments and quality attributes, with deferred commitment to specifics of functional characteristics.
|
From page 7... ...
A corollary of this approach is that architecture leadership is best undertaken by individuals engaged directly in the engineering process and is best separate from activities related to ecosystems certification and other standards-related policy setting. Recommendation 3-2: This committee reiterates the past Defense Science Board recommendations that the DoD follow an architecture-driven acquisition strategy, and, where appropriate, use the software architecture as the basis for a product-line approach and for larger-scale systems potentially involving multiple lead contractors.
|
From page 8... ...
For defense systems, there is particu lar emphasis on addressing hazards related to security, availability and responsiveness, safety, policy adherence, and diverse other attributes, but there are many other quality attributes encompassed by software assurance. In practice, assurance judgments are based on application of a broad range of tech niques that include both preventive and evaluative methods and that are applied throughout a software engineering process.
|
From page 9... ...
Recommendation 4-2: The DoD should expand its research focus on and its investment in both fundamental and incremental advances in assurance-related software engineering technologies and practices. Recommendation 4-3: The DoD should examine commercial best practices for more rapidly tran sitioning assurance-related best practices into development projects, including contracted custom development, supply-chain practice, and in-house development practice.
|
From page 10... ...
Both academic and industry labs are creating the fundamental advances in knowledge that are needed to drive innovation leadership in new technologies and to advance software technologies that are broadly applicable across industry and the DoD supply chain. Directions and priorities for university-originated invention are greatly influenced by funding levels and agency priorities.
|
From page 11... ...
These are important to continue and broaden if university programs are to be relevant. Finding 5-2: Technology has a significant role in enabling modern incremental and iterative software development practices at levels of scale ranging from small teams to large distributed development organizations.
|
From page 12... ...
49-51; Barry Boehm, 2006, "A View of 20th and 21st Century Software Engineering," Proceedings of the th International Conference on Software Engineering, ACM, pp.
|
From page 13... ...
Finding 2-2: The prescription in DoD Instruction 5000.02 for the use of evolutionary development needs to be supplemented by the development of related guidance on the use of such practices as time certain development, requirements prioritization, evidence-based milestones, and risk management. Finding 2-3: Extensions to earned value management models to include evidence of feasibility and to accommodate practices such as time-certain development are necessary conditions to enable success ful application of incremental development practices for innovative systems.
|
From page 14... ...
This need is particularly significant for large-scale innovative software-intensive projects for which there are cross-cutting software architectural requirements and validation challenges. Chapter 3 Finding 3-1: Industry leaders attend to software architecture as a first-order decision, and many follow a product-line strategy based on commitment to the most essential common software architectural elements and ecosystem structures.
|
From page 15... ...
Recommendation 4-1: Effective incentives for preventive software assurance practices and production of evidence across the lifecycle should be instituted for prime contractors and throughout the supply chain. Recommendation 4-2: The DoD should expand its research focus on and investment in both fundamental and incremental advances in assurance-related software engineering technologies and practices.
|
From page 16... ...
Finding 5-2: Technology has a significant role in enabling modern incremental and iterative software development practices at levels of scale ranging from small teams to large distributed development organizations. Recommendation 5-1: The DoD should take immediate action to reinvigorate its investment in software producibility research.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.