Evaluating and improving semistructured merge

Abstract

While unstructured merge tools rely only on textual analysis to detect and resolve conflicts, semistructured merge tools go further by partially exploiting the syntactic structure and semantics of the involved artifacts. Previous studies compare these merge approaches with respect to the number of reported conflicts, showing, for most projects and merge situations, reduction in favor of semistructured merge. However, these studies do not investigate whether this reduction actually leads to integration effort reduction (productivity) without negative impact on the correctness of the merging process (quality). To analyze that, and better understand how merge tools could be improved, in this paper we reproduce more than 30,000 merges from 50 open source projects, identifying conflicts incorrectly reported by one approach but not by the other (false positives), and conflicts correctly reported by one approach but missed by the other (false negatives). Our results and complementary analysis indicate that, in the studied sample, the number of false positives is significantly reduced when using semistructured merge. We also find evidence that its false positives are easier to analyze and resolve than those reported by unstructured merge. However, we find no evidence that semistructured merge leads to fewer false negatives, and we argue that they are harder to detect and resolve than unstructured merge false negatives. Driven by these findings, we implement an improved semistructured merge tool that further combines both approaches to reduce the false positives and false negatives of semistructured merge. We find evidence that the improved tool, when compared to unstructured merge in our sample, reduces the number of reported conflicts by half, has no additional false positives, has at least 8% fewer false negatives, and is not prohibitively slower. CCS Concepts: • General and reference → Empirical studies; • Software and its engineering → Software configuration management and version control systems;

On the Nature of Merge Conflicts: A Study of 2,731 Open Source Java Projects Hosted by GitHub

“…Both studies found that semi-structured merge techniques can reduce the number of conflicts by approximately half, but not eliminate them. Cavalcante et al [44] used the findings from their previous study to improve their semi-structured merge technique to address conflicts involving import declarations and initialization blocks. Although important, the studies by Leßenich et al and…”

Continuous Integration Theater

“…In particular, regardless of the size of the Java projects, 50% of them have infrequent commits. This finding is particularly relevant because if developers take too much time to commit to master (e.g., when working locally or on other branches), they may have to deal with merge conflicts more frequently, which not only require substantial effort from them but also hinder software development activities [18] However, this finding does not ring true when considering Ruby projects. Large Ruby projects, in particular, tend to be more active than the other ones.…”

Predicting Merge Conflicts in Collaborative Software Development

“…Previous studies compared the above merge techniques in practice in terms of speed, quality of resolutions, and the complexity of reported conflicts. For example, Cavalcanti et al [27] focused on unstructured and semi-structured merge tools and found that using semi-structured merge significantly reduces the number of conflicts. The authors also found that the output of semi-structured merge is easier to understand and resolve.…”