Standard

Information Needs in Contemporary Code Review. / Pascarella, Luca; Spadini, Davide; Palomba, Fabio; Bruntink, Magiel; Bacchelli, Alberto.

In: ACM Proceedings on Human-Computer Interaction, Vol. 2, No. CSCW, 11.2018, p. 1-27.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

Harvard

Pascarella, L, Spadini, D, Palomba, F, Bruntink, M & Bacchelli, A 2018, 'Information Needs in Contemporary Code Review' ACM Proceedings on Human-Computer Interaction, vol. 2, no. CSCW, pp. 1-27. https://doi.org/10.1145/3274404

APA

Vancouver

Pascarella L, Spadini D, Palomba F, Bruntink M, Bacchelli A. Information Needs in Contemporary Code Review. ACM Proceedings on Human-Computer Interaction. 2018 Nov;2(CSCW):1-27. https://doi.org/10.1145/3274404

Author

Pascarella, Luca ; Spadini, Davide ; Palomba, Fabio ; Bruntink, Magiel ; Bacchelli, Alberto. / Information Needs in Contemporary Code Review. In: ACM Proceedings on Human-Computer Interaction. 2018 ; Vol. 2, No. CSCW. pp. 1-27.

BibTeX

@article{f80c7da662154a89b20dd98a1a02c350,
title = "Information Needs in Contemporary Code Review",
abstract = "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 needto 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. Inthis paper, we focus on this source of information as a way to gather reliable data on the aforementioned reviewers’ 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 sevenhigh-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. Preprint [https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1405894]. Data andMaterials [https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1405902].",
keywords = "code review, information needs, mining software repositories",
author = "Luca Pascarella and Davide Spadini and Fabio Palomba and Magiel Bruntink and Alberto Bacchelli",
note = "Acknowledgments: European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under the Marie Sklodowska-Curie grant agreement No 642954 Accepted author manuscript",
year = "2018",
month = "11",
doi = "10.1145/3274404",
language = "English",
volume = "2",
pages = "1--27",
journal = "ACM Proceedings on Human-Computer Interaction",
issn = "2573-0142",
publisher = "Association for Computing Machinery (ACM)",
number = "CSCW",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Information Needs in Contemporary Code Review

AU - Pascarella, Luca

AU - Spadini, Davide

AU - Palomba, Fabio

AU - Bruntink, Magiel

AU - Bacchelli, Alberto

N1 - Acknowledgments: European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under the Marie Sklodowska-Curie grant agreement No 642954 Accepted author manuscript

PY - 2018/11

Y1 - 2018/11

N2 - 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 needto 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. Inthis paper, we focus on this source of information as a way to gather reliable data on the aforementioned reviewers’ 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 sevenhigh-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. Preprint [https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1405894]. Data andMaterials [https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1405902].

AB - 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 needto 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. Inthis paper, we focus on this source of information as a way to gather reliable data on the aforementioned reviewers’ 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 sevenhigh-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. Preprint [https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1405894]. Data andMaterials [https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1405902].

KW - code review

KW - information needs

KW - mining software repositories

U2 - 10.1145/3274404

DO - 10.1145/3274404

M3 - Article

VL - 2

SP - 1

EP - 27

JO - ACM Proceedings on Human-Computer Interaction

T2 - ACM Proceedings on Human-Computer Interaction

JF - ACM Proceedings on Human-Computer Interaction

SN - 2573-0142

IS - CSCW

ER -

ID: 53074399