. Langage, . Description, . De-v-´-erification, and . De, 18 <binding client="this.run" server="runner.run"/> 19 <binding client="runner.runnable-step1" server="step1.run"/> 20 <binding client="runner.runnable-step2" server="step2.run"/> 21 <binding client="runner.runnable-step3" server="step3.run"/> 22 <binding client="runner.runnable-step4" server="step4.run"/> 23 <binding client="si.logger" server="logger.log"/> 24 <binding client="step1.logger" server="logger.log"/> 25 <binding client="step2.logger" server="logger.log"/> 26 <binding client="step4.logger" server="logger.log"/> 27 </definition> 6.3ARCHITECTURE 1 <definition name="MySequence"> 2 <!--[...] --> 3 <component name="runner" definition="SequenceStrategy"/> 4 <component name="step1" definition=Step"/> 5 <component name="step2" definition=Step"/> 6 <component name="step3" definition= <binding client="runner.runnable-step1" server="step1.run"/> 9 <binding client="runner.runnable-step2" server="step2.run"/> 10 <binding client="runner.runnable-step3" server="step3.run"/> 11 </definition> 13 <definition name= <component name="runner" definition="SequenceStrategy"/> 16 <component name="step1" definition=Step"/> 17 <component name="step2" definition=Step"/> 18 <component name="step3" definition= <foreach variable="step" 21 values="name(runner/sibling:: * [server(interface::run)])"> 22 <binding client="runner.runnable-%{$step}" server="%{$step}StateMachine" extends="StateManagerAutoBind"> 2 <assert condition="bound(child::client::binding::initial)" 3 message="The state machine should define one initial state <assert condition="count(child:: * ::attribute::final[value(.)==true])>0)" 5 message="The state machine should define at least one final state <assert message="The state machine can not define well states 7 condition="count(child:: * [attribute::final[value(.)==false]]::binding::state-* )>0"/> 8 </definition> 10 <definition name="AtomicTransactionState" extends="StateMachine"> 11 <component name="inactive" definition="StateImpl(true)"> 12 <component name="active" definition="StateImpl(false)"> 13 <component name="suspended" definition="StateImpl(false <binding client="client.initial" server="inactive.state"/> 16 <binding client="inactive.state-start" server="active.state"/> 17 <binding client="active.state-suspend" server="suspended.state"/> 18 <binding client="suspended.state-resume" server="active, ServiceAdapterJTS)"/> 2 <component name="Adapter" definition="AbstractServiceAdapter"/> 3 <component name="Singleton" definition="ThreadSingleton"/> 4 <component name="Factory" definition="CacheFactory(TransactionJTS)"/> 5 <binding client="Adapter.singleton" server="Singleton.singleton"/> 6 <binding client="Adapter.factory" server="Factory.factory"/> 7 <binding client="Singleton.factory" server="Factory.factory"/> 8 </definition> 10 <definition name="TransactionJTS" extends="Prototype,AutoInclude(Adapter,TransactionAdapterJTS), p.11

. Autosharing, > 12 <component name="Strategy" definition=Protocol2PC"/> 13 <component name="Command1" definition=Command2" definition=, 15 </definition> 9.3 Défis soulevés par l'´ etude de la démarcation de transactions . . . . . . . . . . . 166

L. Problématique-de, 180 10.3 Conception du service de transactions adapté 181 10.3.1 Présentation du service de transactions adapté, p.188

C. Des, SERVICES de transactions qui sont soumisàsoumis`soumisà différents standards Parmi ces standards, il est possible de citer les spécifications Object Transaction Service, Java Transaction Service, ou Web Services Atomic Transaction. Cependant, des spécifications comme Web Services Atomic Transaction ont pour objectif d'adapter les standards actuelsàactuels`actuelsà la plate-forme Web Services. Ce mécanisme d'encapsulation introduit une complexité supplémentaire dans le système tout en masquant les spécificités des standards transactionnels existants. Lors de la composition d'applications hétérogènes, il s'avère que les services de transactions sous-jacents ne peuvent pasêtrepas?pasêtre composés demanì ere transparente. Dans ce chapitre, nous présentons une approche pour construire un service de transactions adapté Adapted Transaction Service, capable de supporter plusieurs standards transactionnels simultanément, p.appelé ATS (en anglais

. Sensibilité-au-contexte-dans-ce-chapitre, De plus, ce sont ces taux qui déterminent le choix du protocole de validation comme illustré dans la section précédente. Par conséquent, l'adaptation du protocole de validation au bon moment requiert d'observer le taux de validation et d'abandon des transactions Le taux de validation dépend de l'occurence du cas d'utilisation commit du protocole de validation alors que le taux d'abandon correspond aux cas failure et abort de ce même protocole. L'algorithme d'adaptation du protocole de validation est appelé politique d'adaptation et est défini sous la forme de r` egles de typétypé Evénement/Condition/Action (ECA) L'´ evénement correspondàcorrespond`correspondà la variation du taux de validation/abandon , la condition détermine si l'adaptation doitêtredoit?doitêtre réalisée alors que l'action effectue concrétement le changement du protocole de validation. La figure 11.8 présente un service de transactions (composant Tx Manager) et ses liaisons avec les transactions qu'il supporte (composant Tx(2PC-PX)). Le composant Context Awareness implante la politique d'adaptation. Celui-ci observe le nombre de transactions validées et abandonnées et détecte ainsi le changement de contexte, et décide le changement du protocole de validation. Par exemple, la r` egle ECA rule(abort-rate < 10%, p !=2PC-PC, p=2PC-PC) spécifie que si le taux d'abandon est inférieurinférieur`inférieurà 10% des transactions exécutées, le protocole 2PC-PC doitêtre doit?doitêtre utilisé s'il n'´ etait pas déjà configuré. Afin de comptabiliser le nombre de transactions validées et abandonnées, le composant Context Awareness fournit l'interface subscribe requise par le composant Message Bus des transactions (voir la figure 11, Nous considérons que certaines variations du contexte d'exécution peuvent avoir une influence indirecte sur le taux de validation et d'abandon des transactions Le composant Context Awareness peut ainsî etre notifié de l'´ emission des messages commit et abort par le coordinateur du protocole de validation. 11.4. CATE : UN SERVICE DE TRANSACTIONS SENSIBLE AU CONTEXTE 11.6. CONCLUSION Les auteurs s'intéressentintéressent`intéressentà rendre le processus de tissageadaptationà l'exécution pour l'assemblage de services non-fonctionnels en utilisant des dépdép?dépôts de services [AK05]. Ces dépdép?dépôts hébergent les services non-fonctionnels sous forme de composants et leurs descriptions sous forme de méta-données

. Comparéscomparés-`-comparésà-notre-approche, ReflectTS considèrent le service non-fonctionnel comme granularité d'adaptation. Notre approche propose d'intégrer des propriétés d'autoadaptation dans le service non-fonctionnel en utilisant les composants qui le composent comme granularité d'adaptation. Notre approche est validée sur un exemple démontrant l'intérêt et le bénéfice de l'auto-adaptation pour un service de transactions. Le protocole de validation introduit dans [YWP04] propose de supporter la notion de web ser 12.2. PUBLICATIONS 2, Studia Informatica Universalis Regular Issue, vol.4, issue.1, pp.7-24, 2005.

R. Rouvoy, P. Serrano-alvarado, and P. Merle, A Component-Based Approach to Compose Transaction Standards, 5th International ETAPS Symposium on Software Composition (Vienna, Austria), pp.114-130, 2006.
DOI : 10.1007/11821946_8
URL : https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00482480

M. Procházka, R. Rouvoy, and T. Coupaye, On Enhancing Component-Based Middleware with Transactions, 5th International Symposium on Distributed Object and Applications (Catania), pp.1-2, 2003.
DOI : 10.1007/978-3-540-39962-9_1

R. Rouvoy and P. Merle, Abstraction of Transaction Demarcation in Component-Oriented Platforms, 4th ACM/IFIP/USENIX International Middleware Conference Brasil), pp.305-323, 2003.
DOI : 10.1007/3-540-44892-6_16

N. Ateliers-internationaux-1.-romain-rouvoy, R. Pessemier, P. Pawlak, and . Merle, Using Attribute- Oriented Programming to Leverage Fractal-Based Developments, 5th International ECOOP Workshop on Fractal Component Model, 2006.

R. Rouvoy and P. Merle, Leveraging Component-Oriented Programming with Attribute-Oriented Programming, 11th International ECOOP Workshop on Component- Oriented Programming, 2006.

P. Serrano-alvarado, R. Rouvoy, and P. Merle, Self-Adaptive Component-based transaction Commit Management, Proceedings of the 4th workshop on Reflective and adaptive middleware systems , ARM '05, pp.1-6, 2005.
DOI : 10.1145/1101516.1101527
URL : https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/inria-00001169

R. Rouvoy and P. Merle, Towards a Model Driven Approach to Build Component- Based Adaptable Middleware Travaux présentés dans le chapitre 8. 12.3. PERSPECTIVES 12.3 Perspectives Dans cette section, nous introduisons les perspectives qui s'ouvrentàouvrent`ouvrentà l, 3rd Middleware Workshop on Reflective and Adaptive Middleware AICPS, pp.195-200, 2004.

A. Berrayana, Apport des architecturesàarchitectures`architecturesà composants pour l'administration des intergiciels. ´ Etude de cas : JonasALaCarte, un serveur d'applications J2EE administrable, Thèse de doctorat, 2006.
URL : https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/tel-00097363

S. Alia, P. Chassande-barrioz, and . Dechamboux, Catherine Hamon, et Alexandre Lefebvre, A Middleware Framework for the Persistence and Querying of Java Objects, 18th European Conference on Object-Oriented Programming, pp.291-315, 2004.

J. Aldrich, C. Chambers, and D. Notkin, Architectural Reasoning in Arch- Java, 16th European Conference on Object-Oriented Programming, pp.334-367, 2002.

[. Anwar, S. Chakravarthy, and M. S. Viveros, An Extensible Approach to Realizing Advanced Transaction Models, Advanced Transaction Models and Architectures, pp.259-276, 1997.
DOI : 10.1007/978-1-4615-6217-7_10

J. Yousef, P. K. Al-houmaily, S. P. Chrysanthis, and . Levitan, Enhancing the Performance of Presumed Commit Protocol, 12th ACM Symposium on Applied Computing, pp.131-133, 1997.

[. Arntsen and R. Karlsen, ReflecTS, Proceedings of the 4th workshop on Reflective and adaptive middleware systems , ARM '05, pp.1-6, 2005.
DOI : 10.1145/1101516.1101520

A. Allen, A Formal Approach to Software Architecture, PhD dissertation, Carnegie Mellon, School of Computer Science, 1997.

K. Gopi, K. Attaluri, and . Salem, The Presumed-Either Two-Phase Commit Protocol, IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, vol.14, issue.5, pp.1190-1196, 2002.

R. S. Barga, A Reflective Framework for Implementing Extended Transactions, PhD dissertation, Oregon Graduate Institute, 1998.

S. Gordon, G. Blair, A. Coulson, L. Andersen, M. Blair et al., The Design and Implementation of Open ORB 2, 2001.

M. Besancenot, J. Cart, R. Ferrié, P. Guerraoui, . Pucheral et al., Les systèmes transactionnels : concepts, normes et produits, Collection informatique, Hermès Science, Octobre 1997 Software Architecture in Practice, An Open Component Model and Its Support in Java, 7th Int. Symposium on Component-Based Software Engineering, pp.7-22, 2003.

F. Briclet, C. Contreras, T. Et-philippe-merle-[-bcs02-]-´-eric-bruneton, J. Coupaye, and . Stefani, Software : Practice and Experience ? Special issue on Experiences with Auto-adaptive and Reconfigurable Systems Une infrastructurè a composants pour le déploiement d'applicationsàapplications`applicationsà base de composants CORBA, 1` ere Conférence Francophone sur le Déploiement et la (Re) Configuration de Logiciels The FRACTAL Component Model, Recursive and Dynamic Software Composition with Sharing, 7th Int. Workshop on Component-Oriented Programming for Message Oriented Middleware, 13th Int. Symposium Distributed Computing (Bratislava, Slavak Republic), pp.11-12, 1999.

S. Biliris, N. H. Dar, H. V. Gehani, K. Jagadish, and . Ramamritham, ASSET : A System for Supporting Extended Transactions, ACM/SIGMOD Int. Conference on Management of Data, pp.44-54, 1994.

[. Batista, A. Joolia, and G. Coulson, Managing Dynamic Reconfiguration in Component-Based Systems, 2nd Int. Workshop on Software Architecture, pp.1-17, 2005.
DOI : 10.1007/11494713_1

O. Barais, J. Lawall, A. Meur, and . Et-laurence-duchien, Safe integration of new concerns in a software architecture, 13th Annual IEEE International Symposium and Workshop on Engineering of Computer-Based Systems (ECBS'06), pp.52-64, 2006.
DOI : 10.1109/ECBS.2006.64

P. Bidinger, M. Leclercq, V. Quéma, A. Schmitt, and J. Stefani, Dream Types -A Domain Specific Type System for Component-Based Message- Oriented Middleware, 4th Int. ESEC/FSE Workshop on Specification and Verification of Component-Based Systems, 2005.

S. Roger, C. Barga, and . Pu, A Practical and Modular Method to Implement Extended Transaction Models, Int, Conference on Very Large Data Bases, pp.206-217, 1995.

J. Brichau, Integrative Composition of Program Generators, PhD dissertation, 2005.

M. Bravenboer, R. Vermaas, J. Vinju, and E. Visser, Generalized Type-Based Disambiguation of Meta Programs with Concrete Object Syntax, Conference on Generative Programming and Component Engineering LNCS, vol.3676, issue.7, pp.157-172, 2005.
DOI : 10.1007/11561347_12

[. Coupaye and C. Collet, Denotational Semantics for an Active Rule Execution Model, 2nd Int, Database Systems (London, United Kingdom), pp.36-50, 1995.

[. Conan, Composition d'entités de contexte de ressources système, 3` eme Conférence Francophone Mobilité et Ubiquité, 2006.

K. Panayiotis, K. Chrysanthis, and . Ramamritham, ACTA : a Framework for Specifying and Reasoning about Transaction Structure and Behavior, ACM SIGMOD Int. Conference on Management of Data, pp.194-203, 1990.

K. Panos, K. Chrysanthis, and . Ramamritham, ACTA : the SAGA continues, Database Transaction Models for Advanced Applications, pp.349-397, 1992.

K. Panos, G. Chrysanthis, . Samaras, and J. Et-yousef, Recovery Mechanisms in Database Systems, ch. Recovery and Performance of Atomic Commit Protocols in Distributed and Database Systems, 1998.

S. Denier, H. Albin-amiot, and P. Cointe, Expression and Composition of Design Patterns with Aspects, 2` eme Journée Francophone sur les Développement de Logiciels Par Aspects, RSTI L'Objet, 2005.

P. David, Développement de composants Fractal adaptatifs : un langage dédié dédié`dédiéà l'aspect d'adaptation, Thèse de doctorat, 2005.

R. Ducournau, J. Euzenat, and G. Masini, Langages et modèlesmodèles`modèlesà objets : ´ etat des recherches et perspectives, Didactique Organizing Long-Running Activities with Triggers and Transactions, ACM SIGMOD Int. Conference on Management of Data, issue.19, pp.204-214, 1990.

C. Demarey, G. Harbonnier, R. Rouvoy, and P. Merle, Benchmarking the Round-Trip Latency of Various Java-Based Middleware Platforms, Studia Informatica Universalis Regular Issue, vol.4, issue.1, pp.7-24, 2005.

B. Dumant, F. Horn, F. Dang-tran, and J. Stefani, Jonathan: an open distributed processing environment in Java, Conference on Distributed Systems Platforms and Open Distributed Processing. [DK05], pp.3-12, 1999.
DOI : 10.1088/0967-1846/6/1/301

G. Linda, M. Demichiel, and . Keith, Enterprise JavaBeans (EJB) Specification, Sun Microsystems, Inc., 3, 2005.

P. David and T. Ledoux, Dynamic Adaptation of Non-Functional Concerns An Aspect-Oriented Approach for Developing Self-Adaptive Fractal Components, 5th Int, Workshop on Unanticipated Software Engineering (Malaga, Spain) ETAPS Symposium on Software Composition, 2002.

J. Dubus and P. Merle, Vers l'auto-adaptabilité des architectures logicielles dans les environnements ouverts distribués, 1` ere Conférence Francophone sur les Architectures Logicielles, Hermès Science, pp.13-29, 2006.

R. Dawson, M. F. Engler, . Kaashoek, O. James, and . Jr, Exokernel : an Operating System Architecture for Application-level Resource Management, 50th ACM Symposium on Operating Systems Principles (Copper Mountain, pp.251-266, 1995.

M. Eichberg, T. Schäfer, and M. Mezini, Using Annotations to Check Structural Properties of Classes, 8th Int, Conference on Fundamental Approaches to Software Engineering, pp.237-252, 2005.

F. Exertier and . Deployment, The JOnAS Case Study, 1` ere Conférence Francophone sur le Déploiement et la (Re) Configuration de Logiciels, 2004.

J. Fabry, Modularizing Advanced Transaction Management -Tackling Tangled Aspect Code, PhD dissertation, 2005.

J. Fabry and T. Cleenewerck, Aspect-Oriented Domain Specific Languages for Advanced Transaction Management, 7th Int, Mai 2005, Poster session, pp.428-432, 2005.

J. Fabry, D. Théo, and . Hondt, A Family of Domain-Specific Aspect Languages on Top of KALA, 1st AOSD Workshop on Open and Dynamic Aspect Languages Mars, 2006.

]. Fd06b and K. , Kernel Aspect language for advanced transactions, 21st ACM Symposium on Applied Computing ? Track on Programming Languages, pp.1615-1620, 2006.

A. Flissi and P. Merle, A Generic Deployment Framework for Grid Computing and Distributed Applications, 2nd Int. OTM Symposium on Grid computing, highperformAnce and Distributed Applications, 2006.
DOI : 10.1007/11914952_26
URL : https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00156207

M. Fleury, F. Reverbel, and A. Int, The JBoss Extensible Server, Middleware Conference (Rio de Janeiro, Brasil), pp.344-373, 2003.
DOI : 10.1007/3-540-44892-6_18

J. Fassino, J. Stefani, J. L. Lawall, and G. Muller, Think : A Software Framework for Component-based Operating System Kernels, USENIX Annual Technical Conference, pp.73-86, 2002.

[. Grace, G. S. Blair, and S. Samuel, A reflective framework for discovery and interaction in heterogeneous mobile environments, special section on Discovery and Interaction of Mobile Services, pp.2-14, 2005.
DOI : 10.1145/1055959.1055962

[. Gamma, R. Helm, R. Johnson, and J. Vlissides, Design Patterns : Elements of Reusable Object-Oriented Software, Professional Computing Series, 1995.

[. Georgakopoulos, M. F. Hornick, P. Krychniak, and F. Manola, Specification and Management of Extended Transactions in a Programmable Transaction Environment , 10th IEEE Int, Conference on Data Engineering, pp.462-473, 1994.

M. Ghm-+-03-]-martin-gudgin, N. Hadley, J. Mendelsohn, H. F. Moreau, and . Nielsen, SOAP : Messaging Framework, Microsoft and Sun Microsystems and IBM and Canon, 2003.

M. Giroux, High-Speed ObjectWeb Logger for J2EE Application Servers, Apache- Con'04, 2004.

J. Gosling, B. Joy, G. Steele, and G. Bracha, The Java Language Specification, 2005.

H. Garcia-molina and K. Salem, Using semantic knowledge for transaction processing in a distributed database, ACM Transactions on Database Systems, vol.8, issue.2, 1983.
DOI : 10.1145/319983.319985

D. Garlan, R. T. Monroe, and D. Wile, Acme, CASCON First Decade High Impact Papers on, CASCON '10, pp.47-68, 2000.
DOI : 10.1145/1925805.1925814

[. Gray and A. Reuter, Transaction Processing : Concepts and Techniques, Series in Data Management Systems, 1993.

B. Gray, Notes on Database Operating Systems, Advanced Course : Operating Systems, 1978.

[. Grace, Overcoming Middleware Heterogeneity in Mobile Computing Applications, 2004.

[. Hérault, Adaptabilité des services techniques dans le modèlè a composants, Thèse de doctorat, 2005.

D. Hirschkoff, T. Hirschowitz, D. Pous, A. Schmitt, and J. Stefani, Component-Oriented Programming with Sharing: Containment is Not Ownership, Conference on Generative Programming and Component Engineering LNCS, vol.3676, pp.389-404, 2005.
DOI : 10.1007/11561347_26
URL : https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00310126

W. M. Ho and J. Jézéquel, François Pennaneac'h, et Noël Plouzeau, A toolkit for weaving aspect oriented UML designs, 1st ACM Int. Conference on Aspect Oriented Software Development, 2002.
DOI : 10.1145/508397.508398
URL : http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.404.8877

J. Hannemann and G. Kiczales, Design Pattern Implementation in Java and AspectJ, 17th Annual ACM Conference on Object-Oriented Programming, Systems, Languages, and Applications, pp.161-173, 2002.

C. Hérault and S. Lecomte, Gestion Dynamique des Services Techniques pour Modelè a Composants, 1` ere Conférence Francophone sur le Déploiement et la (Re) Configuration de Logiciels, pp.135-146, 2004.

[. Huang, H. Mei, and F. Yang, Runtime recovery and manipulation of software architecture of component-based systems, Automated Software Engineering, vol.10, issue.1, pp.257-281, 2006.
DOI : 10.1007/s10515-006-7738-4

[. Hérault, S. Nemchenko, and . Et-sylvain-lecomte, A Component-Based Transactional Service, Including Advanced Transactional Models, 5th Int. Symposium and School on Advance Distributed Systems, pp.545-556, 2004.
DOI : 10.1007/11533962_50

[. Corporation, Service Component Architecture (SCA) Specification, 0, 2005.

[. and I. Kurtev, Transforming Models with ATL, Int, MoDELS Workshop on Model Transformations in Practice LNCS, issue.3844, pp.128-138, 2005.

R. Karlsen, An Adaptive Transactional System ??? Framework and Service Synchronization, Int. Symposium on Distributed Objects and Applications LNCS, vol.2888, pp.1208-1225, 2003.
DOI : 10.1007/978-3-540-39964-3_77
URL : http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.102.8058

R. Karlsen, A. Anna-brith, and . Jakobsen, Transaction Service Management -An approach towards a reflective transaction service, pp.135-138, 2003.

D. [. Liu, . Agrawal, . Et-amr-el, and . Abbadi, The performance of two-phase commit protocols in the presence of site failures, Proceedings of IEEE 24th International Symposium on Fault- Tolerant Computing, 1998.
DOI : 10.1109/FTCS.1994.315637

M. Léger, T. Coupaye, and T. Ledoux, Contrôle dynamique de l'intégrité des communications dans les architecturesàarchitectures`architecturesà composants, 12ème Conférence Francophone sur les Langages et ModèlesModèles`Modèlesà Objets, pp.21-36, 2006.

[. Little, The Evolution of a Transaction Processing System, 11th Biennal Workshop on High Performance Transaction Systems, 2005.

[. Leclercq, V. Quéma, and J. Stefani, DREAM: A Component Framework for Constructing Resource-Aware, Configurable Middleware, IEEE Distributed Systems Online, vol.6, issue.9, pp.1-12, 2005.
DOI : 10.1109/MDSO.2005.47

C. Mark, . Little, K. Santosh, and . Shrivastava, An Examination of the Transition of the Arjuna Distributed Transaction Processing Software from Research to Products, 2nd Workshop on Industrial Experiences with Systems Software, pp.41-54, 2002.

A. Le-guennec, G. Sunyé, and J. Jézéquel, Precise modeling of design patterns, 3rd Int, Conference on the Unified Modeling Language : Advancing the Standard, pp.482-496, 2000.

H. Mei, F. Chen, Q. Wang, Y. Feng, and A. /. Adl, ABC/ADL: An ADL Supporting Component Composition, Conference on Formal Engineering Methods LNCS, vol.2495, pp.38-47, 2002.
DOI : 10.1007/3-540-36103-0_6

R. Marvie, L. Duchien, and M. Blay-fornarino, Les plates-formes d'exécution et l'IDM, ch, p.236, 2006.

J. Magee, N. Dulay, S. Eisenbach, and J. Kramer, Specifying distributed software architectures, 5th European Software Engineering Conference, pp.137-153, 1995.
DOI : 10.1007/3-540-60406-5_12
URL : http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.25.7933

J. Magee, N. Dulay, and J. Kramer, A Constructive Development Environment for Parallel and Distributed Programs, 2nd IEEE Int, Configurable Distributed Systems, pp.4-14, 1994.

H. Mei and . Abc, Supporting Software Architectures in the Whole Lifecycle, 2nd Int, Conference on Software Engineering and Formal Methods, pp.342-343, 2004.

J. Mesnil, Overview of JOTM : a Java Open Transaction Manager, 10th Biennal Workshop on High Performance Transaction Systems, 2003.

P. Muller, F. Fleurey, and J. Jézéquel, Weaving Executability into Object-Oriented Meta-Languages, 8th Int, Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems, pp.264-278, 2005.
DOI : 10.1007/11557432_19
URL : http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.77.6003

H. Mei and G. Huang, PKUAS : An Architecture-Based Reflective Component Operating Platform, 10th IEEE Int, Future Trends of Distributed Computing Systems, pp.163-169, 2004.

B. [. Mohan, E. R. Lindsay, and . Obermarck, Transaction management in the R* distributed database management system, ACM Transactions on Database Systems, vol.11, issue.4, 1986.
DOI : 10.1145/7239.7266

R. T. Monroe, Capturing Software Architecture Design Expertise with Armani, Rapport technique CMU-CS-98-163, MT00] Nenad Medvidovic et Richard N. Taylor, A Classification and Comparison Framework for Software Architecture Description Languages, pp.70-93, 2000.
DOI : 10.1145/243327.243616

E. Najm, A. Nimour, and J. Stefani, Behavioural Typing for Objects and Process Calculi, Formal methods for distributed processing : a survey of objectoriented approaches, pp.281-301, 2001.

L. David and . Parnas, On the Criteria To Be Used in Decomposing Systems into Modules, Communications of the ACM, vol.15, issue.12, pp.1053-1058, 1972.

[. Parlavantzas, [Paw05] Renaud Pawlak, Spoon : Annotation-Driven Program Transformation -The AOP Case, 1st Int. Middleware Workshop on Aspect-Oriented Middleware Development, pp.1-6, 2005.

[. Procházka and F. Plasil, Container-Interposed Transactions, special session on Component-Based Software Engineering of the SNPD international conference, Aô ut 2001. [PRC03] Marek Procházka, Romain Rouvoy, et Thierry Coupaye, On Enhancing Component- Based Middleware with Transactions, 5th Int. Symposium on Distributed Object and Applications (Catania), pp.1-2, 2003.

N. Pessemier, L. Seinturier, T. Coupaye, and . Et-laurence-duchien, A Model for Developing Component-Based and Aspect-Oriented Systems, 5th Int. ETAPS Symposium on Software Composition, pp.259-273, 2006.
DOI : 10.1007/11821946_17
URL : https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/inria-00126352

R. Pawlak, L. Seinturier, L. Duchien, G. Florin, F. Legond-aubry et al., JAC : an aspect-based distributed dynamic framework , Software : Practice and Experience, pp.1119-1148, 2004.
DOI : 10.1002/spe.605
URL : http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.651.8831

G. D. Parrington, S. K. Shrivastava, S. M. Wheater, C. Mark, and . Little, The Design and Implementation of Arjuna, Computing Systems, vol.8, issue.3, pp.255-308, 1995.

V. Quéma and R. Balter, ScalAgent, une plate-forme ?? composants pour applications asynchrones, Techniques et sciences informatiques, vol.23, issue.2, pp.253-274, 2004.
DOI : 10.3166/tsi.23.253-274

[. Quéma, Vers l'exogiciel : une approche de la construction d'infrastructures logicielles radicalement configurables, Thèse de doctorat, 2005.

[. Rouvoy and P. Merle, Abstraction of Transaction Demarcation in Component-Oriented Platforms, Middleware Conference (Rio de Janeiro, Brasil), pp.305-323, 2003.
DOI : 10.1007/3-540-44892-6_16

J. E. Robbins and D. F. Redmiles, Cognitive support, UML adherence, and XMI interchange in Argo/UML, Information and Software Technology, vol.42, issue.2, pp.79-89, 2000.
DOI : 10.1016/S0950-5849(99)00083-X

[. Rouvoy, P. Serrano-alvarado, and P. Merle, A Component-Based Approach to Compose Transaction Standards, 5th Int. ETAPS Symposium on Software Composition, pp.114-130, 2006.
DOI : 10.1007/11821946_8
URL : https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00482480

P. Serrano-alvarado, R. Rouvoy, and P. Merle, Self-Adaptive Component-Based Transaction Commit Management, 4th Int, Middleware Workshop on Adaptive and Reflective Middleware, pp.1-6, 2005.

M. Shaw, R. Deline, D. V. Klein, T. L. Ross, D. M. Young et al., Abstractions for software architecture and tools to support them, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, vol.21, issue.4, pp.314-335, 1995.
DOI : 10.1109/32.385970

K. Santosh, G. N. Shrivastava, G. D. Dixon, and . Parrington, An Overview of the Arjuna Distributed Programming System, IEEE Software, vol.8, issue.1, pp.66-73, 1991.

L. Seinturier, N. Pessemier, L. Duchien, and . Et-thierry-coupaye, A Component Model Engineered with Components and Aspects, 9th Int, SIGSOFT Symposium on Component-Based Software Engineering (Västeras, Sweden), pp.139-153, 2006.

[. Schiavoni, V. Quéma, . Posteriori-defensive, and . Programming, An Annotation Toolkit for DoS-Resistant Component-Based Architectures [The92] The Open Group, Distributed Transaction Processing : The XA Specification, 21st ACM Symposium on Applied ComputingSun02] Sun Microsystems, Java Management Extensions Instrumentation and Agent (JMX), 1996.

A. Van-deursen, P. Klint, and J. Visser, Domain-specific languages, ACM SIGPLAN Notices, vol.35, issue.6, pp.26-36, 2000.
DOI : 10.1145/352029.352035

G. Waignier, A. Meur, and . Et-laurence-duchien, A Generic Framework for Integrating New Functionnalities into Software Architectures, 2nd Int, Juillet 2006. [Wor99] World Wide Web Consortium, XML Path Language (XPath), W3C Recommendation, 1999.

N. Wang, K. Parameswaran, D. C. Schmidt, and O. Othman, The Design and Performance of Meta-Programming Mechanisms for Object Request Broker Middleware, 6th USENIX Int Conference on Object-Oriented Technologies and Systems, Janvier 2001. [WR03] Craig Walls et Norman Richards Actions series, 2003.

H. Wada and J. Suzuki, Modeling Turnpike Frontend System: A Model-Driven Development Framework Leveraging UML Metamodeling and Attribute-Oriented Programming, Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems, pp.584-600, 2005.
DOI : 10.1007/11557432_44

H. Wada, J. Suzuki, S. Takada, and N. Doi, A Model Transformation Framework for Domain Specific Languages : An Approach Using UML and Attribute- Oriented Programming, 9th World Multi-Conference on Systemics Leveraging Metamodeling and Attribute-Oriented Programming to Build a Modeldriven Framework for Domain Specific Languages, Juillet 2005. [WSTD05b] 8th JSSST Conference on Systems Programming and its Applications Japan Society for Software Science and Technology, 2005.

W. Yu, Y. Wang, and C. Pu, A Dynamic Two-Phase Commit Protocol for Self- Adapting Services, IEEE Int. Conference on Services Computing, pp.7-15, 2004.