Mining file histories: should we consider branches?

Abstract

Modern distributed version control systems, such as Git, offer support for branching-the possibility to develop parts of software outside the master trunk. Consideration of the repository structure in Mining Software Repository (MSR) studies requires a thorough approach to mining, but there is no well-documented, widespread methodology regarding the handling of merge commits and branches. Moreover, there is still a lack of knowledge of the extent to which considering branches during MSR studies impacts the results of the studies. In this study, we set out to evaluate the importance of proper handling of branches when calculating file modification histories. We analyze over 1,400 Git repositories of four open source ecosystems and compute modification histories for over two million files, using two different algorithms. One algorithm only follows the first parent of each commit when traversing the repository, the other returns the full modification history of a file across all branches. We show that the two algorithms consistently deliver different results, but the scale of the difference varies across projects and ecosystems. Further, we evaluate the importance of accurate mining of file histories by comparing the performance of common techniques that rely on file modification history-reviewer recommendation, change recommendation, and defect prediction-for two algorithms of file history retrieval. We find that considering full file histories leads to an increase in the techniques' performance that is rather modest. CCS CONCEPTS • Software and its engineering → Software configuration management and version control systems;

Githru: Visual Analytics for Understanding Software Development History Through Git Metadata Analysis

“…At the same time as an unintended side effect of decentralization, Git can also create implicit branches as illustrated in Fig. 2 [16,46]. Suppose that a developer pulled the latest snapshot from the remote repository, added several commits to the local repository (repo #1), and pushed them back.…”

The Rise of Android Code Smells: Who is to Blame?

“…However, researchers observed that Git, the de facto VCS platform, is not mining-friendly [6], [23], [30]. Indeed, Git was not designed for an accurate retrieval of history changes [32]. For this purpose, many studies highlighted Git pitfalls and urged the MSR community to address them [6], [23], [31].…”

“…For this purpose, many studies highlighted Git pitfalls and urged the MSR community to address them [6], [23], [31]. In particular, a recent study of Kovalenko et al [32] showed that handling branches and renamings is crucial for an accurate tracking of contributions in Git. Our proposed toolkit, SNIFFER, complies with these guidelines and proposes a renaming and branch aware analysis of the change history.…”

Empirical study on the usage of graph query languages in open source Java projects

“…At the technical level, we perform parsing to extract method content; we track simple refactorings of files and methods to prevent wrong changes according to [5]; we consider branches to correctly capture changes that are merged into the master [42]; and we determine characteristics of SPARQL and Cypher repositories by performing a linear regression analysis to generalize on the population that we sampled from.…”

“…In [9,37,38], the promises and perils of mining GitHub's open-source data for empirical analysis is discussed. The effects of branching in the repository history on empirical studies is discussed in [42]. We treat branching by a dedicated method.…”