Dataset Open Access

Information Needs in Contemporary Code Review - Appendix

Luca Pascarella; Davide Spadini; Fabio Palomba; Magiel Bruntink; Alberto Bacchelli


DataCite XML Export

<?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8'?>
<resource xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns="http://datacite.org/schema/kernel-4" xsi:schemaLocation="http://datacite.org/schema/kernel-4 http://schema.datacite.org/meta/kernel-4.1/metadata.xsd">
  <identifier identifierType="DOI">10.5281/zenodo.1405902</identifier>
  <creators>
    <creator>
      <creatorName>Luca Pascarella</creatorName>
      <nameIdentifier nameIdentifierScheme="ORCID" schemeURI="http://orcid.org/">0000-0001-8289-7736</nameIdentifier>
      <affiliation>Delft University of Technology</affiliation>
    </creator>
    <creator>
      <creatorName>Davide Spadini</creatorName>
      <nameIdentifier nameIdentifierScheme="ORCID" schemeURI="http://orcid.org/">0000-0003-2997-1890</nameIdentifier>
      <affiliation>Software Improvement Group</affiliation>
    </creator>
    <creator>
      <creatorName>Fabio Palomba</creatorName>
      <nameIdentifier nameIdentifierScheme="ORCID" schemeURI="http://orcid.org/">0000-0001-9337-5116</nameIdentifier>
      <affiliation>University of Zurich</affiliation>
    </creator>
    <creator>
      <creatorName>Magiel Bruntink</creatorName>
      <nameIdentifier nameIdentifierScheme="ORCID" schemeURI="http://orcid.org/">0000-0002-6117-6347</nameIdentifier>
      <affiliation>Software Improvement Group</affiliation>
    </creator>
    <creator>
      <creatorName>Alberto Bacchelli</creatorName>
      <nameIdentifier nameIdentifierScheme="ORCID" schemeURI="http://orcid.org/">0000-0003-0193-6823</nameIdentifier>
      <affiliation>University of Zurich</affiliation>
    </creator>
  </creators>
  <titles>
    <title>Information Needs in Contemporary Code Review - Appendix</title>
  </titles>
  <publisher>Zenodo</publisher>
  <publicationYear>2018</publicationYear>
  <subjects>
    <subject>Gerrit</subject>
    <subject>Software mining</subject>
    <subject>Information needs</subject>
  </subjects>
  <dates>
    <date dateType="Issued">2018-10-30</date>
  </dates>
  <resourceType resourceTypeGeneral="Dataset"/>
  <alternateIdentifiers>
    <alternateIdentifier alternateIdentifierType="url">https://zenodo.org/record/1405902</alternateIdentifier>
  </alternateIdentifiers>
  <relatedIdentifiers>
    <relatedIdentifier relatedIdentifierType="DOI" relationType="IsVersionOf">10.5281/zenodo.1405901</relatedIdentifier>
    <relatedIdentifier relatedIdentifierType="URL" relationType="IsPartOf">https://zenodo.org/communities/empirical-software-engineering</relatedIdentifier>
  </relatedIdentifiers>
  <rightsList>
    <rights rightsURI="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode">Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International</rights>
    <rights rightsURI="info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess">Open Access</rights>
  </rightsList>
  <descriptions>
    <description descriptionType="Abstract">&lt;p&gt;Contemporary code review is a widespread practice used by software engineers to maintain high software quality and share project knowledge. However, conducting proper code review takes time and developers often have limited time for review. In this paper, we aim at investigating the information that reviewers need to conduct a proper code review, to better understand this process and how research and tool support can make developers become more effective and efficient reviewers. Previous work has provided evidence that a successful code review process is one in which reviewers and authors actively participate and collaborate. In these cases, the threads of discussions that are saved by code review tools are a precious source of information that can be later exploited for research and practice. In this paper, we focus on this source of information as a way to gather reliable data on the aforementioned reviewers&amp;rsquo; needs. We manually analyze 900 code review comments from three large open-source projects and organize them in categories by means of a card sort. Our results highlight the presence of seven high-level information needs, such as knowing the uses of methods and variables declared/modified in the code under review. Based on these results we suggest ways in which future code review tools can better support collaboration and the reviewing task. Appendix material.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
  </descriptions>
  <fundingReferences>
    <fundingReference>
      <funderName>European Commission</funderName>
      <funderIdentifier funderIdentifierType="Crossref Funder ID">10.13039/501100000780</funderIdentifier>
      <awardNumber awardURI="info:eu-repo/grantAgreement/EC/H2020/642954/">642954</awardNumber>
      <awardTitle>Software ENgineering in Enterprise Cloud Applications  systems</awardTitle>
    </fundingReference>
    <fundingReference>
      <funderName>Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung</funderName>
      <funderIdentifier funderIdentifierType="Crossref Funder ID">10.13039/501100001711</funderIdentifier>
      <awardNumber awardURI="info:eu-repo/grantAgreement/SNSF/Careers/PP00P2_170529/">PP00P2_170529</awardNumber>
      <awardTitle>Data-driven Contemporary Code Review</awardTitle>
    </fundingReference>
  </fundingReferences>
</resource>
86
6
views
downloads
All versions This version
Views 8686
Downloads 66
Data volume 3.4 GB3.4 GB
Unique views 8080
Unique downloads 66

Share

Cite as