Why Did your PR Get Rejected?: Defining Guidelines for Avoiding PR Rejection in Open Source Projects

N. Papadakis, Ayan Patel, Tanay Gottigundala, Alexandra Garro, Xavier Graham, Bruno Carreiro da Silva
{"title":"Why Did your PR Get Rejected?: Defining Guidelines for Avoiding PR Rejection in Open Source Projects","authors":"N. Papadakis, Ayan Patel, Tanay Gottigundala, Alexandra Garro, Xavier Graham, Bruno Carreiro da Silva","doi":"10.1145/3387940.3392235","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Pull requests are a commonly used method of collaboration for software developers working on open source projects. In this paper, we analyze the most common reasons, sentiment polarity, and interaction length for pull request rejections, as well as the correlations between these factors in a large open-source project called Scapy. We manually analyzed 231 rejected pull requests and systematically mapped sentiment and categorized rejection reasons. We found that the most frequent reasons for pull request rejection refer to source code management issues, incomplete comprehension of project functionalities, poor understanding of what reviewers expect, and misunderstanding the project guidelines (often due to a lack of complete/updated instructions and communication gaps). This work is an ongoing effort toward establishing practical guidelines for globally distributed contributors in open-source projects to minimize pull request rejection and maximize productivity leading to more fruitful remote collaboration. Future work involves expanding the analysis to more projects and incorporating quantitative methods.","PeriodicalId":309659,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the IEEE/ACM 42nd International Conference on Software Engineering Workshops","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-06-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the IEEE/ACM 42nd International Conference on Software Engineering Workshops","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3387940.3392235","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Pull requests are a commonly used method of collaboration for software developers working on open source projects. In this paper, we analyze the most common reasons, sentiment polarity, and interaction length for pull request rejections, as well as the correlations between these factors in a large open-source project called Scapy. We manually analyzed 231 rejected pull requests and systematically mapped sentiment and categorized rejection reasons. We found that the most frequent reasons for pull request rejection refer to source code management issues, incomplete comprehension of project functionalities, poor understanding of what reviewers expect, and misunderstanding the project guidelines (often due to a lack of complete/updated instructions and communication gaps). This work is an ongoing effort toward establishing practical guidelines for globally distributed contributors in open-source projects to minimize pull request rejection and maximize productivity leading to more fruitful remote collaboration. Future work involves expanding the analysis to more projects and incorporating quantitative methods.
为什么你的PR被拒绝了?:定义在开源项目中避免PR拒绝的指导方针
对于从事开源项目的软件开发人员来说,Pull请求是一种常用的协作方法。在本文中,我们在一个名为Scapy的大型开源项目中分析了拉请求拒绝的最常见原因、情感极性和交互长度,以及这些因素之间的相关性。我们手动分析了231个被拒绝的拉请求,系统地映射了情感,并对拒绝原因进行了分类。我们发现,pull请求被拒绝的最常见原因是源代码管理问题,对项目功能的不完全理解,对评审人员期望的理解不足,以及对项目指导方针的误解(通常是由于缺乏完整/更新的指示和沟通差距)。这项工作是一项正在进行的工作,旨在为开源项目中的全球分布式贡献者建立实用的指导方针,以最大限度地减少拉请求拒绝,并最大限度地提高生产率,从而实现更富有成效的远程协作。未来的工作包括将分析扩展到更多的项目并结合定量方法。
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