Software code review, i.e., the practice of having third-party team members critique changes to a software system, is a well-established best practice in both open source and proprietary software domains. Prior work has shown that the formal code inspections of the past tend to improve the quality of software delivered by students and small teams. However, the formal code inspection process mandates strict review criteria (e.g., in-person meetings and reviewer checklists) to ensure a base level of review quality, while the modern, lightweight code reviewing process does not. Although recent work explores the modern code review process qualitatively, little research quantitatively explores the relationship between properties of the modern code review process and software quality. Hence, in this paper, we study the relationship between software quality and: (1) code review coverage, i.e., the proportion of changes that have been code reviewed, and (2) code review participation, i.e., the degree of reviewer involvement in the code review process. Through a case study of the Qt, VTK, and ITK projects, we find that both code review coverage and participation share a significant link with software quality. Low code review coverage and participation are estimated to produce components with up to two and five additional post-release defects respectively. Our results empirically confirm the intuition that poorly reviewed code has a negative impact on software quality in large systems using modern reviewing tools.
Abstract-Human Affectiveness, i.e., the emotional state of a person, plays a crucial role in many domains where it can make or break a team's ability to produce successful products. Software development is a collaborative activity as well, yet there is little information on how affectiveness impacts software productivity. As a first measure of this impact, this paper analyzes the relation between sentiment, emotions and politeness of developers in more than 560K Jira comments with the time to fix a Jira issue. We found that the happier developers are (expressing emotions such as JOY and LOVE in their comments), the shorter the issue fixing time is likely to be. In contrast, negative emotions such as SADNESS, are linked with longer issue fixing time. Politeness plays a more complex role and we empirically analyze its impact on developers' productivity.
Software code review, i.e., the practice of having other team members critique changes to a software system, is a well-established best practice in both open source and proprietary software domains. Prior work has shown that formal code inspections tend to improve the quality of delivered software. However, the formal code inspection process mandates strict review criteria (e.g., in-person meetings and reviewer checklists) to ensure a base level of review quality, while the modern, lightweight code reviewing process does not. Although recent work explores the modern code review process, little is known about the relationship between modern code review practices and long-term software quality. Hence, in this paper, we study the relationship between post-release defects (a popular proxy for long-term software quality) and: (1) code review coverage, i.e., the proportion of changes that have been code reviewed, (2) code review participation, i.e., the degree of reviewer involvement in the code review process, and (3) code reviewer expertise, i.e., the level of domain-specific expertise of the code reviewers. Through a case study of the Qt, VTK, and ITK projects, we find that code review coverage, participation, and expertise share a significant link with software quality. Hence, our results empirically confirm the intuition Empir Software Eng that poorly-reviewed code has a negative impact on software quality in large systems using modern reviewing tools.
Software development is a collaborative activity in which developers interact to create and maintain a complex software system. Human collaboration inevitably evokes emotions like joy or sadness, which can affect the collaboration either positively or negatively, yet not much is known about the individual emotions and their role for software development stakeholders. In this study, we analyze whether development artifacts like issue reports carry any emotional information about software development. This is a first step towards verifying the feasibility of an automatic tool for emotion mining in software development artifacts: if humans cannot determine any emotion from a software artifact, neither can a tool. Analysis of the Apache Software Foundation issue tracking system shows that developers do express emotions (in particular gratitude, joy and sadness). However, the more context is provided about an issue report, the more human raters start to doubt and nuance their interpretation of emotions. More investigation is needed before building a fully automatic emotion mining tool.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.