Bug Tracking Process Smells In Practice

Erdem Tuna, V. Kovalenko, Eray Tüzün
{"title":"Bug Tracking Process Smells In Practice","authors":"Erdem Tuna, V. Kovalenko, Eray Tüzün","doi":"10.1145/3510457.3513080","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Software teams use bug tracking (BT) tools to report and manage bugs. Each record in a bug tracking system (BTS) is a reporting entity consisting of several information fields. The contents of the reports are similar across different tracking tools, though not the same. The variation in the workflow between teams prevents defining an ideal process of running BTS. Nevertheless, there are best practices reported both in white and gray literature. Developer teams may not adopt the best practices in their BT process. This study investigates the non-compliance of developers with best practices, so-called smells, in the BT process. We mine bug reports of four projects in the BTS of JetBrains, a software company, to observe the prevalence of BT smells in an industrial setting. Also, we survey developers to see (1) if they recognize the smells, (2) their perception of the severity of the smells, and (3) the potential benefits of a BT process smell detection tool. We found that (1) smells occur, and their detection requires a solid understanding of the BT practices of the projects, (2) smell severity perception varies across smell types, and (3) developers considered that a smell detection tool would be useful for six out of the 12 smell categories.","PeriodicalId":119790,"journal":{"name":"2022 IEEE/ACM 44th International Conference on Software Engineering: Software Engineering in Practice (ICSE-SEIP)","volume":"6 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2022 IEEE/ACM 44th International Conference on Software Engineering: Software Engineering in Practice (ICSE-SEIP)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3510457.3513080","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Software teams use bug tracking (BT) tools to report and manage bugs. Each record in a bug tracking system (BTS) is a reporting entity consisting of several information fields. The contents of the reports are similar across different tracking tools, though not the same. The variation in the workflow between teams prevents defining an ideal process of running BTS. Nevertheless, there are best practices reported both in white and gray literature. Developer teams may not adopt the best practices in their BT process. This study investigates the non-compliance of developers with best practices, so-called smells, in the BT process. We mine bug reports of four projects in the BTS of JetBrains, a software company, to observe the prevalence of BT smells in an industrial setting. Also, we survey developers to see (1) if they recognize the smells, (2) their perception of the severity of the smells, and (3) the potential benefits of a BT process smell detection tool. We found that (1) smells occur, and their detection requires a solid understanding of the BT practices of the projects, (2) smell severity perception varies across smell types, and (3) developers considered that a smell detection tool would be useful for six out of the 12 smell categories.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Bug跟踪过程在实践中很糟糕
软件团队使用bug跟踪(BT)工具来报告和管理bug。bug跟踪系统(BTS)中的每条记录都是由几个信息字段组成的报告实体。报告的内容在不同的跟踪工具之间是相似的,尽管不相同。团队之间工作流程的差异阻碍了定义运行BTS的理想流程。尽管如此,在白色和灰色文献中都有最佳实践报告。开发团队可能不会在他们的BT过程中采用最佳实践。本研究调查了开发人员在BT过程中不遵守最佳实践的情况,即所谓的气味。我们在软件公司JetBrains的BTS中挖掘了四个项目的bug报告,以观察BT气味在工业环境中的流行程度。此外,我们还调查了开发人员,以了解(1)他们是否识别气味,(2)他们对气味严重程度的感知,以及(3)BT过程气味检测工具的潜在好处。我们发现(1)气味是存在的,它们的检测需要对项目的BT实践有深入的了解,(2)气味严重程度的感知因气味类型而异,(3)开发人员认为气味检测工具将对12种气味类别中的6种有用。
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 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Industry's Cry for Tools that Support Large-Scale Refactoring Code Reviewer Recommendation in Tencent: Practice, Challenge, and Direction* What's bothering developers in code review? The Impact of Flaky Tests on Historical Test Prioritization on Chrome Surveying the Developer Experience of Flaky Tests
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1