"International Workshop on Mining Software Repositories (MSR 2004)" W17S Workshop - 26th International Conference on Software E 2004
DOI: 10.1049/ic:20040466
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Preprocessing CVS data for fine-grained analysis

Abstract: Abstract

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
131
1
3

Year Published

2006
2006
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
5
4

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 176 publications
(135 citation statements)
references
References 14 publications
0
131
1
3
Order By: Relevance
“…The common approach to link the modifications to the bug reports is to look for pointers in the commit messages to the bug tracking database [3], [21], [22]. For Eclipse, we follow a similar approach and employ regular expressions for an accurate reconstruction of the links between the bug reports and the corresponding modifications as follows: 1) Scanning the repository logs, group the files that are modified by the same author with the same commit message with a time fuzziness of 200 seconds [23]. This step is necessary as CVS repositories store the changes made to each file separately.…”
Section: Experimental Evaluationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The common approach to link the modifications to the bug reports is to look for pointers in the commit messages to the bug tracking database [3], [21], [22]. For Eclipse, we follow a similar approach and employ regular expressions for an accurate reconstruction of the links between the bug reports and the corresponding modifications as follows: 1) Scanning the repository logs, group the files that are modified by the same author with the same commit message with a time fuzziness of 200 seconds [23]. This step is necessary as CVS repositories store the changes made to each file separately.…”
Section: Experimental Evaluationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We converted the commit stream into a sequence of transactions. Following common practice for mining CVS repositories [21], we considered all commits sharing a user and log message performed during a given time window to constitute a transaction. After this step, the change history of the system can be abstracted as a series of We then considered that each set of changed elements associated with a transaction formed a basic concern mapping.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Such information includes details such as how the code was changed, the files affected by the change, when the change was made, who made the change, and an optional explanation (known as the log message) as to why the change was made. Several files submitted to the version archive by the same developer, at the same time, with the same log message, are said to be part of the same commit transaction [18]. Reasons for changes to the code include feature additions, bug fixes, or refactoring.…”
Section: Version Archivesmentioning
confidence: 99%