4.7 Article

Exploration of DevOps testing process capabilities: An ISM and fuzzy TOPSIS analysis

期刊

APPLIED SOFT COMPUTING
卷 116, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.asoc.2021.108377

关键词

DevOps; Testing capabilities; ISM; Fuzzy TOPSIS; MICMAC

资金

  1. Deanship of Scientific Re-search, King Saud University, Saudi Arabia

向作者/读者索取更多资源

DevOps is a collaborative culture between development and operation teams aiming to develop high-quality software products. By analyzing research results, a testing capability structure can be established to select the best testing capabilities and support automated testing practices in the DevOps process.
DevOps is an emerging paradigm that refer to a collaborative culture of development and operation teams aiming to develop the high quality software product. Software organizations are adopting DevOps culture for software development and easy maintenance instead of using traditional SDLC mechanism. To enter the production stage, in DevOps process, the software product have to pass through quality gates were the software are tested during development phase to meet the established targeted criteria. This indicates that the mechanism of testing in DevOps process is not straightforward, and to establish strong DevOps testing platform there is a need to explore more automated testing practices. Thus, using multivocal literature review approach, we have selected 39 studies and identify the 20 testing capabilities. Finally, the interpretive structure modeling (ISM) and fuzzy technique for order preference by similarity to ideal solution (fuzzy TOPSIS) were applied. The results shows that (C2, CCi=0.808; C6, CCi=0.720; and C3, CCi=0.705) are top ranked testing capabilities. Using analysis results, we develop a holistic structure of testing capabilities to show their inter-relationship with each other and their priorities to select the best testing capabilities for DevOps process. (C) 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据