{"title":"Deciphering refactoring branch dynamics in modern code review: An empirical study on Qt","authors":"Eman Abdullah AlOmar","doi":"10.1016/j.infsof.2024.107596","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Context:</h3><div>Modern code review is a widely employed technique in both industrial and open-source projects, serving to enhance software quality, share knowledge, and ensure compliance with coding standards and guidelines. While code review is extensively studied for its general challenges, best practices, outcomes, and socio-technical aspects, little attention has been paid to how refactoring is reviewed and what developers prioritize when reviewing refactored code in the ‘Refactor’ branch.</div></div><div><h3>Objective:</h3><div>The goal is to understand the review process for refactoring changes in the ‘Refactor’ branch and to identify what developers care about when reviewing code in this branch.</div></div><div><h3>Method:</h3><div>In this study, we present a quantitative and qualitative examination to understand the main criteria developers use to decide whether to accept or reject refactored code submissions and identify the challenges inherent in this process.</div></div><div><h3>Results:</h3><div>Analyzing 2154 refactoring and non-refactoring reviews across Qt open-source projects, we find that reviews involving refactoring from the ‘Refactor’ branch take significantly less time to resolve in terms of code review efforts. Additionally, documentation of developer intent is notably sparse within the ‘Refactor’ branch compared to other branches. Furthermore, through thematic analysis of a substantial sample of refactoring code review discussions, we construct a comprehensive taxonomy consisting of 12 refactoring review criteria.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion:</h3><div>Our findings underscore the importance of developing precise and efficient tools and techniques to aid developers in the review process amidst refactorings.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":54983,"journal":{"name":"Information and Software Technology","volume":"177 ","pages":"Article 107596"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Information and Software Technology","FirstCategoryId":"94","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0950584924002015","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"计算机科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Context:
Modern code review is a widely employed technique in both industrial and open-source projects, serving to enhance software quality, share knowledge, and ensure compliance with coding standards and guidelines. While code review is extensively studied for its general challenges, best practices, outcomes, and socio-technical aspects, little attention has been paid to how refactoring is reviewed and what developers prioritize when reviewing refactored code in the ‘Refactor’ branch.
Objective:
The goal is to understand the review process for refactoring changes in the ‘Refactor’ branch and to identify what developers care about when reviewing code in this branch.
Method:
In this study, we present a quantitative and qualitative examination to understand the main criteria developers use to decide whether to accept or reject refactored code submissions and identify the challenges inherent in this process.
Results:
Analyzing 2154 refactoring and non-refactoring reviews across Qt open-source projects, we find that reviews involving refactoring from the ‘Refactor’ branch take significantly less time to resolve in terms of code review efforts. Additionally, documentation of developer intent is notably sparse within the ‘Refactor’ branch compared to other branches. Furthermore, through thematic analysis of a substantial sample of refactoring code review discussions, we construct a comprehensive taxonomy consisting of 12 refactoring review criteria.
Conclusion:
Our findings underscore the importance of developing precise and efficient tools and techniques to aid developers in the review process amidst refactorings.
期刊介绍：
Information and Software Technology is the international archival journal focusing on research and experience that contributes to the improvement of software development practices. The journal''s scope includes methods and techniques to better engineer software and manage its development. Articles submitted for review should have a clear component of software engineering or address ways to improve the engineering and management of software development. Areas covered by the journal include:
• Software management, quality and metrics,
• Software processes,
• Software architecture, modelling, specification, design and programming
• Functional and non-functional software requirements
• Software testing and verification & validation
• Empirical studies of all aspects of engineering and managing software development
Short Communications is a new section dedicated to short papers addressing new ideas, controversial opinions, "Negative" results and much more. Read the Guide for authors for more information.
The journal encourages and welcomes submissions of systematic literature studies (reviews and maps) within the scope of the journal. Information and Software Technology is the premiere outlet for systematic literature studies in software engineering.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
