اشترك بالحزمة الذهبية واحصل على وصول غير محدود شمرا أكاديميا
تسجيل مستخدم جديدIdentifying Unmaintained Projects in GitHub
132
0
0.0
(
0
)
نشر من قبل
Marco Tulio Valente
تاريخ النشر
2018
مجال البحث
الهندسة المعلوماتية
والبحث باللغة
English
اسأل ChatGPT حول البحث
ﻻ يوجد ملخص باللغة العربية
Background: Open source software has an increasing importance in modern software development. However, there is also a growing concern on the sustainability of such projects, which are usually managed by a small number of developers, frequently working as volunteers. Aims: In this paper, we propose an approach to identify GitHub projects that are not actively maintained. Our goal is to alert users about the risks of using these projects and possibly motivate other developers to assume the maintenance of the projects. Method: We train machine learning models to identify unmaintained or sparsely maintained projects, based on a set of features about project activity (commits, forks, issues, etc). We empirically validate the model with the best performance with the principal developers of 129 GitHub projects. Results: The proposed machine learning approach has a precision of 80%, based on the feedback of real open source developers; and a recall of 96%. We also show that our approach can be used to assess the risks of projects becoming unmaintained. Conclusions: The model proposed in this paper can be used by open source users and developers to identify GitHub projects that are not actively maintained anymore.
قيم البحث
اقرأ أيضاً
Software testing is one of the very important Quality Assurance (QA) components. A lot of researchers deal with the testing process in terms of tester motivation and how tests should or should not be written. However, it is not known from the recomme
ndations how the tests are written in real projects. In this paper, the following was investigated: (i) the denotation of the word test in different natural languages; (ii) whether the number of occurrences of the word test correlates with the number of test cases; and (iii) what testing frameworks are mostly used. The analysis was performed on 38 GitHub open source repositories thoroughly selected from the set of 4.3M GitHub projects. We analyzed 20,340 test cases in 803 classes manually and 170k classes using an automated approach. The results show that: (i) there exists a weak correlation (r = 0.655) between the number of occurrences of the word test and the number of test cases in a class; (ii) the proposed algorithm using static file analysis correctly detected 97% of test cases; (iii) 15% of the analyzed classes used main() function whose represent regular Java programs that test the production code without using any third-party framework. The identification of such tests is very complex due to implementation diversity. The results may be leveraged to more quickly identify and locate test cases in a repository, to understand practices in customized testing solutions, and to mine tests to improve program comprehension in the future.
In any sufficiently complex software system there are experts, having a deeper understanding of parts of the system than others. However, it is not always clear who these experts are and which particular parts of the system they can provide help with
. We propose a framework to elicit the expertise of developers and recommend experts by analyzing complexity measures over time. Furthermore, teams can detect those parts of the software for which currently no, or only few experts exist and take preventive actions to keep the collective code knowledge and ownership high. We employed the developed approach at a medium-sized company. The results were evaluated with a survey, comparing the perceived and the computed expertise of developers. We show that aggregated code metrics can be used to identify experts for different software components. The identified experts were rated as acceptable candidates by developers in over 90% of all cases.
When programmers look for how to achieve certain programming tasks, Stack Overflow is a popular destination in search engine results. Over the years, Stack Overflow has accumulated an impressive knowledge base of snippets of code that are amply docum
ented. We are interested in studying how programmers use these snippets of code in their projects. Can we find Stack Overflow snippets in real projects? When snippets are used, is this copy literal or does it suffer adaptations? And are these adaptations specializations required by the idiosyncrasies of the target artifact, or are they motivated by specific requirements of the programmer? The large-scale study presented on this paper analyzes 909k non-fork Python projects hosted on Github, which contain 290M function definitions, and 1.9M Python snippets captured in Stack Overflow. Results are presented as quantitative analysis of block-level code cloning intra and inter Stack Overflow and GitHub, and as an analysis of programming behaviors through the qualitative analysis of our findings.
README files play an essential role in shaping a developers first impression of a software repository and in documenting the software project that the repository hosts. Yet, we lack a systematic understanding of the content of a typical README file a
s well as tools that can process these files automatically. To close this gap, we conduct a qualitative study involving the manual annotation of 4,226 README file sections from 393 randomly sampled GitHub repositories and we design and evaluate a classifier and a set of features that can categorize these sections automatically. We find that information discussing the `What and `How of a repository is very common, while many README files lack information regarding the purpose and status of a repository. Our multi-label classifier which can predict eight different categories achieves an F1 score of 0.746. To evaluate the usefulness of the classification, we used the automatically determined classes to label sections in GitHub README files using badges and showed files with and without these badges to twenty software professionals. The majority of participants perceived the automated labeling of sections based on our classifier to ease information discovery. This work enables the owners of software repositories to improve the quality of their documentation and it has the potential to make it easier for the software development community to discover relevant information in GitHub README files.
Discussions is a new feature of GitHub for asking questions or discussing topics outside of specific Issues or Pull Requests. Before being available to all projects in December 2020, it had been tested on selected open source software projects. To un
derstand how developers use this novel feature, how they perceive it, and how it impacts the development processes, we conducted a mixed-methods study based on early adopters of GitHub discussions from January until July 2020. We found that: (1) errors, unexpected behavior, and code reviews are prevalent discussion categories; (2) there is a positive relationship between project member involvement and discussion frequency; (3) developers consider GitHub Discussions useful but face the problem of topic duplication between Discussions and Issues; (4) Discussions play a crucial role in advancing the development of projects; and (5) positive sentiment in Discussions is more frequent than in Stack Overflow posts. Our findings are a first step towards data-informed guidance for using GitHub Discussions, opening up avenues for future work on this novel communication channel.
سجل دخول لتتمكن من نشر تعليقات
التعليقات
جاري جلب التعليقات
سجل دخول لتتمكن من متابعة معايير البحث التي قمت باختيارها
