The Importance of Being Isolated: An Empirical Study on Chromium Reviews

As large scale software development has become more collaborative, and software teams more globally distributed, several studies have explored how developer interaction influences software development outcomes. The emphasis so far has been largely on outcomes like defect count, the time to close modification requests etc. In the paper, we examine data from the Chromium project to understand how different aspects of developer discussion relate to the closure time of reviews. On the basis of analyzing reviews discussed by 2000+ developers, our results indicate that quicker closure of reviews owned by a developer relates to higher reception of information and insights from peers. However, we also find evidence that higher engagement in collaboration by a developer is associated with slower closure of the reviews she owns. Within the scope of our study, these results lead us to conclude that peer review of code may have a distinct dynamic that is facilitated by developers working in relative isolation.

[1]  Diana Adler,et al.  Using Multivariate Statistics , 2016 .

[2]  Rudolf Ramler,et al.  Building Defect Prediction Models in Practice , 2014 .

[3]  Andy Zaidman,et al.  Modern code reviews in open-source projects: which problems do they fix? , 2014, MSR 2014.

[4]  James D. Herbsleb,et al.  Communication networks in geographically distributed software development , 2008, CSCW.

[5]  Michael W. Godfrey,et al.  The influence of non-technical factors on code review , 2013, 2013 20th Working Conference on Reverse Engineering (WCRE).

[6]  Shane McIntosh,et al.  The impact of code review coverage and code review participation on software quality: a case study of the qt, VTK, and ITK projects , 2014, MSR 2014.

[7]  Hongfang Liu,et al.  Building effective defect-prediction models in practice , 2005, IEEE Software.

[8]  Daniel M. German,et al.  Open source software peer review practices , 2008, 2008 ACM/IEEE 30th International Conference on Software Engineering.

[9]  Daniel M. Germán,et al.  Peer Review on Open-Source Software Projects: Parameters, Statistical Models, and Theory , 2014, TSEM.

[10]  Daniela E. Damian,et al.  Predicting build failures using social network analysis on developer communication , 2009, 2009 IEEE 31st International Conference on Software Engineering.

[11]  Laurie A. Williams,et al.  Strengthening the empirical analysis of the relationship between Linus' Law and software security , 2010, ESEM '10.

[12]  Mary E. Helander,et al.  Seeing inside: Using social network analysis to understand patterns of collaboration and coordination in global software teams , 2007, International Conference on Global Software Engineering (ICGSE 2007).

[13]  Eric S. Raymond,et al.  The cathedral and the bazaar - musings on Linux and Open Source by an accidental revolutionary , 2001 .

[14]  Nachiappan Nagappan,et al.  Predicting defects with program dependencies , 2009, 2009 3rd International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement.

[15]  Gail C. Murphy,et al.  Who should fix this bug? , 2006, ICSE.

[16]  Christian Bird,et al.  Convergent contemporary software peer review practices , 2013, ESEC/FSE 2013.

[17]  Margaret-Anne D. Storey,et al.  Understanding broadcast based peer review on open source software projects , 2011, 2011 33rd International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE).

[18]  Albert-László Barabási,et al.  Statistical mechanics of complex networks , 2001, ArXiv.

[19]  Hajimu Iida,et al.  Who does what during a code review? Datasets of OSS peer review repositories , 2013, 2013 10th Working Conference on Mining Software Repositories (MSR).

[20]  Kate Ehrlich,et al.  All-for-one and one-for-all?: a multi-level analysis of communication patterns and individual performance in geographically distributed software development , 2012, CSCW.

[21]  Roger Guimerà,et al.  Team Assembly Mechanisms Determine Collaboration Network Structure and Team Performance , 2005, Science.

[22]  Alberto Bacchelli,et al.  Expectations, outcomes, and challenges of modern code review , 2013, 2013 35th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE).

[23]  Daniela E. Damian,et al.  Does distance still matter? , 2008, Softw. Process. Improv. Pract..