Code Review Quality: How Developers See It

Oleksii Kononenko, Olga Baysal, Michael W. Godfrey
{"title":"Code Review Quality: How Developers See It","authors":"Oleksii Kononenko, Olga Baysal, Michael W. Godfrey","doi":"10.1145/2884781.2884840","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In a large, long-lived project, an effective code review process is key to ensuring the long-term quality of the code base. In this work, we study code review practices of a large, open source project, and we investigate how the developers themselves perceive code review quality. We present a qualitative study that summarizes the results from a survey of 88 Mozilla core developers. The results provide developer insights into how they define review quality, what factors contribute to how they evaluate submitted code, and what challenges they face when performing review tasks. We found that the review quality is primarily associated with the thoroughness of the feedback, the reviewer's familiarity with the code, and the perceived quality of the code itself. Also, we found that while different factors are perceived to contribute to the review quality, reviewers often find it difficult to keep their technical skills up-to-date, manage personal priorities, and mitigate context switching.","PeriodicalId":6485,"journal":{"name":"2016 IEEE/ACM 38th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE)","volume":"33 1","pages":"1028-1038"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-05-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"148","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2016 IEEE/ACM 38th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/2884781.2884840","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 148

Abstract

In a large, long-lived project, an effective code review process is key to ensuring the long-term quality of the code base. In this work, we study code review practices of a large, open source project, and we investigate how the developers themselves perceive code review quality. We present a qualitative study that summarizes the results from a survey of 88 Mozilla core developers. The results provide developer insights into how they define review quality, what factors contribute to how they evaluate submitted code, and what challenges they face when performing review tasks. We found that the review quality is primarily associated with the thoroughness of the feedback, the reviewer's familiarity with the code, and the perceived quality of the code itself. Also, we found that while different factors are perceived to contribute to the review quality, reviewers often find it difficult to keep their technical skills up-to-date, manage personal priorities, and mitigate context switching.
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
代码评审质量:开发人员如何看待它
在大型的、长期存在的项目中,有效的代码审查过程是确保代码库长期质量的关键。在这项工作中,我们研究了一个大型开源项目的代码审查实践,我们调查了开发人员自己是如何看待代码审查质量的。我们提出了一项定性研究,总结了对88名Mozilla核心开发人员的调查结果。结果为开发人员提供了他们如何定义评审质量,哪些因素影响了他们如何评估提交的代码,以及他们在执行评审任务时面临的挑战。我们发现评审质量主要与反馈的完整性、评审人员对代码的熟悉程度以及对代码本身的感知质量有关。此外,我们发现,虽然不同的因素被认为对评审质量有贡献,但评审人员经常发现很难保持他们的技术技能是最新的,管理个人优先级,并减少上下文切换。
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
Scalable Thread Sharing Analysis Overcoming Open Source Project Entry Barriers with a Portal for Newcomers Nomen est Omen: Exploring and Exploiting Similarities between Argument and Parameter Names Reliability of Run-Time Quality-of-Service Evaluation Using Parametric Model Checking On the Techniques We Create, the Tools We Build, and Their Misalignments: A Study of KLEE
×
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