## 6 Results
### Professionals' Remarks  
The methodology and the framework were also shared with the professionals. In a video, the framework was introduced, and the processes of adding an optional feature on a mature domain and the effects of this feature addition on the feature, variability, and the BPMN models, as well as the method calls, are shown [33]. After watching the video, the professionals were asked to answer some questions about their opinions. This survey was conducted using the Internet. A total of 32 professionals participated in the survey. The survey questions are given in Appendix B and the answers are presented in [34]. The profile of the professionals (their work experience, company profile, and current working type) is shown in Figure 11.  
Figure 10: Questions about required time and the responses. Figure 9: Questions about transitions between models and the responses. In Figure 12, we see the answers given by the product-based working professionals regarding questions related with the products they are working on. When we ask the question \"Are you maintaining a single version (the most recent version) of the product you are working on?\", 69% of them answered \"No, Multiple Versions\". That means most of them maintain the products with different configurations. Additionally, 69% of them find it difficult to see the overall picture and 92% of them have difficulties because of the size of the product, especially when they want to add a new feature to the product. After watching the video that we introduced in our methodology on the framework, 100% of them answered \"Yes\" to the question \"Specific to the field you are working in, would a Framework be useful?\". In Figure 13, we see the answers given by all the professionals about the easiness of the framework in different perspectives, including developing a domain, creating a product, adding a feature, connecting a feature model with BPMN, and connecting BPMN with method calls. The evaluations of professionals with an average of 7.73 years of work experience are around 8 points, and these responses are greater than students' evaluations. Figure 11: Profile of the professionals. Figure 12: Product-based working professionals’ answers. An open-ended question is also asked: \"What are your views on the suitability of this methodology for professional life?\". Some answers are listed below:  
* In general, it will be useful for the structural standardization of the code. Models created by experienced teams will automatically ensure that less experienced employees stay within the quality constraints;
* It can be used easily and effectively in many large and small projects, and the time it saves in the development process cannot be underestimated;
* Low-code libraries make software development processes much easier and shorter today. Low-code development will become much more widespread in the future of the rapidly developing software industry;
* In general, the requirements are analyzed, a software/system is designed on top of it, and the whole development process continues, both waterfall and iterative. The Variability-Guided Development method seems to be able to parallelize both high- and low-level designs in waterfall or iterative processes. At the same time, it is a method that will minimize the workload when a new project is desired with the capabilities already in the product pool. It has an important place in creating backlogs for new features that need to be implemented. When Software Product Line is considered, maybe it will be helpful to deliver a project without the need for a developer;
* It can minimize the deficiencies that may occur during the manual management of multiple versions and the varying configurations of these versions. In addition, it will reduce the time spent managing the configurations with each changing version;
* It is very logical and solution-oriented because the project I am working on needs a framework just like this one.