Preface
It is our pleasure to welcome the reader to the proceedings of the First International Workshop on Requirements Prioritization and Enactment, PrioRE'17 co-located with the 23rd International Working Conference on Requirements Engineering: Foundation for Software Quality (REFSQ 20167) held in Essen, Germany.
First in its series, the PrioRE'17 aims to play a role in bringing research experts and practitioners together, and provide them with a platform to exchange their visions on requirements prioritization, release planning and their enactment. The main focus will be on how requirements can be best prioritized, and how the releases are planned and enacted.
The Requirements Engineering process starts with requirements elicitation and gathering, and ends with their enactment { i.e., the planning of their actual implementation and release. While the requirements elicitation phase is strongly user-oriented, as it aims at capturing the user needs and preferences, requirements enactment implies a decision making activity done by the software development company, with the purpose of nding a proper implementation scheduling on the basis of the company's resource availability and other constraints. For this reason, practitioners are continuously challenged by the need to a ord costs { money, time, human resources, etc { that limit their capability to deliver the implementation of new, user-requested requirements. This cost-value trade-o weighs substantially on the success or failure of software projects, and businesses in general. In order to tackle this problem and minimize the associated risk of failure, careful but fast decision making activities have to be put in place, to (i) prioritize the requirements, determining the order in which requirements are implemented in an incremental development cycle; and (ii) properly enact them into a concrete and resource-a ordable development plan.
The selection of papers was based on the reviews of an international program committee. Each paper has received at least three reviews from program committee members and organisers. The reviews evaluated the maturity of manuscripts, their scope with regard to the workshop goals, and the soundness of the presented ideas. Based on the reviews, ve papers were accepted for presentation at the workshop. Two papers were accepted as a full paper, and three were accepted as short papers. We, the organisers, thank the program committee members for their e ort:
All of the members of the program committee provided very useful hints to the authors and submitted their reviews in time. Our special thanks go to all of them.