2008 23rd IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering 2008
DOI: 10.1109/ase.2008.28
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Connecting Programming Environments to Support Ad-Hoc Collaboration

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
40
0

Year Published

2009
2009
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
3
3
2

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 53 publications
(40 citation statements)
references
References 15 publications
0
40
0
Order By: Relevance
“…(The average project size was 11'776 lines of code in 68 classes). [19] detect, inspect no no real-time no yes no no no CollabVS [16] detect detect, inspect yes real-time yes yes no no no Crystal [4] detect detect no commit no no yes no no WeCode [15] detect detect no saving no no yes no no CloudStudio [10] prevent, detect, inspect detect, inspect no real-time yes yes yes no yes Collabode [14] no no -no no no no yes no Cloud9 [6] no no -no no no no yes no whether it supports detection of direct conflicts and of indirect conflicts (cf. [26]); whether conflict reports may include false positives; whether conflicts are available in real-time or upon commit; the granularity of the awareness system (line, class, or branch); whether collaborative editing supports shared sessions a la Google Doc and automatic merging of versions.…”
Section: Design Of the Empirical Studymentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…(The average project size was 11'776 lines of code in 68 classes). [19] detect, inspect no no real-time no yes no no no CollabVS [16] detect detect, inspect yes real-time yes yes no no no Crystal [4] detect detect no commit no no yes no no WeCode [15] detect detect no saving no no yes no no CloudStudio [10] prevent, detect, inspect detect, inspect no real-time yes yes yes no yes Collabode [14] no no -no no no no yes no Cloud9 [6] no no -no no no no yes no whether it supports detection of direct conflicts and of indirect conflicts (cf. [26]); whether conflict reports may include false positives; whether conflicts are available in real-time or upon commit; the granularity of the awareness system (line, class, or branch); whether collaborative editing supports shared sessions a la Google Doc and automatic merging of versions.…”
Section: Design Of the Empirical Studymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These experiments normally involve [16], [10], [26] small (2 or 3 people) teams working on controlled artificial exercises (such as refactoring) that can be carried out in a short programming session. In other cases [4], the experiments used regression data from open-source software repositories to estimate the effectiveness of their conflict detection mechanisms.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…One approach to help distributed teams is described in [1]. Developers use a programming environment that allows them to be aware of the methods on which their team members are working.…”
Section: Motivationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Recently, there has been a significant effort on crafting tools and techniques to promote team awareness in a collaborative context [13], [14], [15], [7], [16].…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Recently, there has been an increased interest in addressing such collaboration issues, which resulted in full-fledged collaborative software development environments, such as IBM's jazz.net [6] or Microsoft's CollabVS [7]. These are industrial environments, especially suited for distributed and collaborative software development.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%