Techniques for Identifying the Country Origin of Mailing List Participants

Tang, Rui; Hassan, Ahmed E.; Zou, Ying

doi:10.1109/wcre.2009.46

Cited by 5 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, developers may use either a display name or user name when committing changes to the GIT repository. Therefore, for each developer we obtain both his/her display name and user name from JIRA, and link the changes in GIT associated to one of the names [32].…”

Section: Rq3: Who Fixes Dormant Bugs?mentioning

confidence: 99%

An empirical study of dormant bugs

Chen

Nagappan

Shihab

et al. 2014

Proceedings of the 11th Working Conference on Mining Software Repositories

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Over the past decade, several research efforts have studied the quality of software systems by looking at post-release bugs. However, these studies do not account for bugs that remain dormant (i.e., introduced in a version of the software system, but are not found until much later) for years and across many versions. Such dormant bugs skew our understanding of the software quality.In this paper we study dormant bugs against non-dormant bugs using data from 20 different open-source Apache foundation software systems. We find that 33% of the bugs introduced in a version are not reported till much later (i.e., they are reported in future versions as dormant bugs). Moreover, we find that 18.9% of the reported bugs in a version are not even introduced in that version (i.e., they are dormant bugs from prior versions). In short, the use of reported bugs to judge the quality of a specific version might be misleading. Exploring the fix process for dormant bugs, we find that they are fixed faster (median fix time of 5 days) than nondormant bugs (median fix time of 8 days), and are fixed by more experienced developers (median commit counts of developers who fix dormant bug is 169% higher). Our results highlight that dormant bugs are different from non-dormant bugs in many perspectives and that future research in software quality should carefully study and consider dormant bugs.

show abstract

Section: Rq3: Who Fixes Dormant Bugs?mentioning

confidence: 99%

An empirical study of dormant bugs

Chen

Nagappan

Shihab

et al. 2014

Proceedings of the 11th Working Conference on Mining Software Repositories

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Emails provide additional metadata (author, date and time, threading, etc.) that enable further analyses, such as the social interaction between participants [8], geographic analysis [23], the behavior of developers and users [20], the correlation between mailing lists development activity [7].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Linking e-mails and source code artifacts

Bacchelli

Lanza

Robbes

2010

Proceedings of the 32nd ACM/IEEE International Conference on Software Engineering - Volume 1

148

114

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

E-mails concerning the development issues of a system constitute an important source of information about high-level design decisions, low-level implementation concerns, and the social structure of developers.Establishing links between e-mails and the software artifacts they discuss is a non-trivial problem, due to the inherently informal nature of human communication. Different approaches can be brought into play to tackle this traceability issue, but the question of how they can be evaluated remains unaddressed, as there is no recognized benchmark against which they can be compared.In this article we present such a benchmark, which we created through the manual inspection of a statistically significant number of e-mails pertaining to six unrelated software systems. We then use our benchmark to measure the effectiveness of a number of approaches, ranging from lightweight approaches based on regular expressions to full-fledged information retrieval approaches.

show abstract

Who? Where? What? Examining distributed development in two large open source projects

Nagappan¹

2012

2012 9th IEEE Working Conference on Mining Software Repositories (MSR)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Techniques for Identifying the Country Origin of Mailing List Participants

Cited by 5 publications

References 7 publications

An empirical study of dormant bugs

An empirical study of dormant bugs

Linking e-mails and source code artifacts

Who? Where? What? Examining distributed development in two large open source projects

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About