On the Diffuseness of Code Technical Debt in Open Source Projects

Valentina Lenarduzzi, Nyyti Saarimaki, D. Taibi
{"title":"On the Diffuseness of Code Technical Debt in Open Source Projects","authors":"Valentina Lenarduzzi, Nyyti Saarimaki, D. Taibi","doi":"10.1109/TechDebt.2019.00028","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background. Companies commonly invest majorBackground. Companies commonly invest major effort into removing, respectively not introducing, technical debt issues detected by static analysis tools such as SonarQube, Cast, or Coverity. These tools classify technical debt issues into categories according to severity, and developers commonly pay attention to not introducing issues with a high level of severity that could generate bugs or make software maintenance more difficult. Objective. In this work, we aim to understand the diffuseness of Technical Debt (TD) issues and the speed with which developers remove them from the code if they introduced such an issue. The goal is to understand which type of TD is more diffused and how much attention is paid by the developers, as well as to investigate whether TD issues with a higher level of severity are resolved faster than those with a lower level of severity. We conducted a case study across 78K commits of 33 Java projects from the Apache Software Foundation Ecosystem to investigate the distribution of 1.4M TD items. Results. TD items introduced into the code are mostly related to code smells (issues that can increase the maintenance effort). Moreover, developers commonly remove the most severe issues faster than less severe ones. However, the time needed to resolve issues increases when the level of severity increases (minor issues are removed faster that blocker ones). Conclusion. One possible answer to the unexpected issue of resolution time might be that severity is not correctly defined by the tools. Another possible answer is that the rules at an intermediate severity level could be the ones that technically require more time to be removed. The classification of TD items, including their severity and type, require thorough investigation from a research point of view.effort into removing, respectively not introducing, technical debtissues detected by static analysis tools such as SonarQube, Cast, or Coverity. These tools classify technical debt issues intocategories according to severity, and developers commonly payattention to not introducing issues with a high level of severitythat could generate bugs or make software maintenance moredifficult. Objective. In this work, we aim to understand the diffuseness ofTechnical Debt (TD) issues and the speed with which developersremove them from the code if they introduced such an issue. The goal is to understand which type of TD is more diffusedand how much attention is paid by the developers, as well asto investigate whether TD issues with a higher level of severityare resolved faster than those with a lower level of severity. Weconducted a case study across 78K commits of 33 Java projectsfrom the Apache Software Foundation Ecosystem to investigatethe distribution of 1.4M TD items. Results. TD items introduced into the code are mostly relatedto code smells (issues that can increase the maintenance effort). Moreover, developers commonly remove the most severe issuesfaster than less severe ones. However, the time needed to resolveissues increases when the level of severity increases (minor issuesare removed faster that blocker ones). Conclusion. One possible answer to the unexpected issue ofresolution time might be that severity is not correctly definedby the tools. Another possible answer is that the rules at anintermediate severity level could be the ones that technicallyrequire more time to be removed. The classification of TD items, including their severity and type, require thorough investigationfrom a research point of view.","PeriodicalId":197657,"journal":{"name":"2019 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Technical Debt (TechDebt)","volume":"96 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"36","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2019 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Technical Debt (TechDebt)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/TechDebt.2019.00028","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 36

Abstract

Background. Companies commonly invest majorBackground. Companies commonly invest major effort into removing, respectively not introducing, technical debt issues detected by static analysis tools such as SonarQube, Cast, or Coverity. These tools classify technical debt issues into categories according to severity, and developers commonly pay attention to not introducing issues with a high level of severity that could generate bugs or make software maintenance more difficult. Objective. In this work, we aim to understand the diffuseness of Technical Debt (TD) issues and the speed with which developers remove them from the code if they introduced such an issue. The goal is to understand which type of TD is more diffused and how much attention is paid by the developers, as well as to investigate whether TD issues with a higher level of severity are resolved faster than those with a lower level of severity. We conducted a case study across 78K commits of 33 Java projects from the Apache Software Foundation Ecosystem to investigate the distribution of 1.4M TD items. Results. TD items introduced into the code are mostly related to code smells (issues that can increase the maintenance effort). Moreover, developers commonly remove the most severe issues faster than less severe ones. However, the time needed to resolve issues increases when the level of severity increases (minor issues are removed faster that blocker ones). Conclusion. One possible answer to the unexpected issue of resolution time might be that severity is not correctly defined by the tools. Another possible answer is that the rules at an intermediate severity level could be the ones that technically require more time to be removed. The classification of TD items, including their severity and type, require thorough investigation from a research point of view.effort into removing, respectively not introducing, technical debtissues detected by static analysis tools such as SonarQube, Cast, or Coverity. These tools classify technical debt issues intocategories according to severity, and developers commonly payattention to not introducing issues with a high level of severitythat could generate bugs or make software maintenance moredifficult. Objective. In this work, we aim to understand the diffuseness ofTechnical Debt (TD) issues and the speed with which developersremove them from the code if they introduced such an issue. The goal is to understand which type of TD is more diffusedand how much attention is paid by the developers, as well asto investigate whether TD issues with a higher level of severityare resolved faster than those with a lower level of severity. Weconducted a case study across 78K commits of 33 Java projectsfrom the Apache Software Foundation Ecosystem to investigatethe distribution of 1.4M TD items. Results. TD items introduced into the code are mostly relatedto code smells (issues that can increase the maintenance effort). Moreover, developers commonly remove the most severe issuesfaster than less severe ones. However, the time needed to resolveissues increases when the level of severity increases (minor issuesare removed faster that blocker ones). Conclusion. One possible answer to the unexpected issue ofresolution time might be that severity is not correctly definedby the tools. Another possible answer is that the rules at anintermediate severity level could be the ones that technicallyrequire more time to be removed. The classification of TD items, including their severity and type, require thorough investigationfrom a research point of view.
论开源项目中代码技术债的弥散性
背景。公司一般投资专业背景。公司通常将主要精力投入到移除(而不是引入)静态分析工具(如SonarQube、Cast或Coverity)检测到的技术债务问题上。这些工具根据严重程度将技术债务问题分类,开发人员通常注意不要引入可能产生错误或使软件维护更加困难的严重程度较高的问题。目标。在这项工作中,我们的目标是了解技术债务(TD)问题的普遍性,以及开发人员在引入此类问题时从代码中删除它们的速度。目标是了解哪种类型的TD更分散,开发人员对其关注程度如何,以及调查严重程度较高的TD问题是否比严重程度较低的TD问题解决得更快。我们对来自Apache软件基金会生态系统的33个Java项目的78K次提交进行了案例研究,以调查140万个TD项目的分布。结果。引入代码的TD项主要与代码气味(可能增加维护工作量的问题)相关。此外,开发人员通常会比不太严重的问题更快地消除最严重的问题。然而,当问题的严重程度增加时,解决问题所需的时间也会增加(小问题比阻塞问题消除得更快)。结论。对于意想不到的解决时间问题,一个可能的答案可能是工具没有正确定义严重性。另一个可能的答案是,中等严重级别的规则可能是那些在技术上需要更多时间才能被删除的规则。TD项目的分类,包括其严重程度和类型,需要从研究的角度进行彻底的调查。努力去除(而不是引入)静态分析工具(如SonarQube、Cast或Coverity)检测到的技术缺陷。这些工具根据严重程度将技术债务问题分类,开发人员通常注意不要引入可能产生错误或使软件维护更加困难的严重程度较高的问题。目标。在这项工作中,我们的目标是了解技术债务(TD)问题的普遍性,以及开发人员在引入此类问题时从代码中删除它们的速度。我们的目标是了解哪种类型的TD更分散,以及开发者对TD的关注程度,以及调查严重程度较高的TD问题是否比严重程度较低的TD问题解决得更快。我们对来自Apache软件基金会生态系统的33个Java项目的78K次提交进行了一个案例研究,以调查140万个TD项目的分布。结果。引入代码的TD项主要与代码气味(可能增加维护工作量的问题)有关。此外,开发人员通常会比不太严重的问题更快地消除最严重的问题。然而,当问题的严重程度增加时,解决问题所需的时间也会增加(小问题比阻塞问题消除得更快)。结论。对于意想不到的解决时间问题,一个可能的答案可能是工具没有正确定义严重性。另一个可能的答案是,中等严重级别的规则可能是那些在技术上需要更多时间才能取消的规则。TD项目的分类,包括其严重程度和类型,需要从研究的角度进行彻底的调查。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信