-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 19
/
references.bib
339 lines (311 loc) · 15.1 KB
/
references.bib
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
% This file was created with JabRef 2.6.
% Encoding: UTF-8
@book{swebok2004,
address = {EUA},
author = {{IEEE Computer Society}},
editor = {Bourque, Pierre and Dupuis, Robert},
publisher = {IEEE Press},
title = {Software Engineering Body of Knowledge (SWEBOK)},
url = {http://www.swebok.org/},
year = {2014}
}
@ARTICLE{Eastwood1993,
author = {A. Eastwood},
title = {Firm fires shots at legacy systems},
journal = {Computing Canada},
year = {1993},
volume = {19},
pages = {17},
number = {2}
}
@ARTICLE{Erlikh2000,
author = {Len Erlikh},
title = {Leveraging Legacy System Dollars for E-Business},
journal = {IT Professional},
year = {2000},
volume = {2},
pages = {17--23},
number = {3},
address = {Piscataway, NJ, USA},
doi = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/6294.846201},
issn = {1520-9202},
owner = {ycc},
publisher = {IEEE Educational Activities Department},
timestamp = {2008.01.14}
}
@INPROCEEDINGS{Bennett2000,
author = {Keith H. Bennett and V\'{a}clav T. Rajlich},
title = {Software maintenance and evolution: a roadmap},
booktitle = {Proceedings of the Conference on The Future of Software Engineering
(ICSE'00)},
year = {2000},
pages = {73--87},
address = {New York, NY, USA},
month = {May},
publisher = {ACM Press},
doi = {http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/336512.336534},
isbn = {1-58113-253-0},
location = {Limerick, Ireland},
owner = {yguarata},
timestamp = {2007.09.17}
}
@INPROCEEDINGS{Bertram2010,
author = {Dane Bertram and Amy Voida and Saul Greenberg and Robert Walker},
title = {Communication, collaboration, and bugs: the social nature of issue
tracking in small, collocated teams},
booktitle = {Proceedings of the 2010 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative
Work (CSCW'2010)},
year = {2010},
pages = {291--300},
publisher = {ACM},
cite = {1},
organizationinstitutioncompany = {University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada},
owner = {yguarata},
problemaddressed = {change request process understanding},
studytype = {exploratory study},
timestamp = {2013.03.18}
}
@Article{CavalcantiSQJ2011,
Title = {The bug report duplication problem: an exploratory study},
Author = {Yguarat{\~a} Cerqueira Cavalcanti and Paulo Anselmo da Mota Silveira Neto and Daniel Lucrédio and Tassio Vale and Eduardo Santana de Almeida and Silvio Romero de Lemos Meira},
Journal = {Software Quality Journal},
Year = {2013},
Note = {Online first on 2011},
Pages = {36--66},
Volume = {21},
__markedentry = {[yguarata:6]},
Abstract = {Duplicate bug report entries in bug trackers have a negative impact on software maintenance and evolution. This is due, among other factors, to the increased time spent on report analysis and validation, which in some cases takes over 20 min. Therefore, a considerable amount of time is lost in duplicate bug report analysis. In order to understand the possible factors that cause bug report duplication and its impact on software development, this paper presents an exploratory study in which bug tracking data from private and open source projects were analyzed. The results show, for example, that all projects we investigated had duplicate bug reports and a considerable amount of time was wasted by this duplication. Furthermore, features such as project lifetime, staff size, and the number of bug reports do not seem to be significant factors for duplication, while others, such as the submitters’ profile and the number of submitters, do seem to influence the bug report duplication.},
Issue = {1},
Keyword = {Computer Science},
Owner = {yguarata},
Publisher = {Springer Netherlands},
Timestamp = {2014.02.06}
}
@misc{Bugzilla,
author = {Bugzilla},
note = {URL: https://www.bugzilla.org},
year = {2013},
}
@misc{Mantis,
author = {{Mantis Bug Tracker}},
note = {URL: https://www.mantisbt.org},
year = {2013},
}
@misc{Trac,
author = {{The Trac Project}},
note = {URL: https://trac.edgewall.org},
year = {2013},
}
@INPROCEEDINGS{Aljarah2011,
author = {Aljarah, I. and Banitaan, S. and Abufardeh, S. and Jin, W. and Salem,
S.},
title = {Selecting discriminating terms for bug assignment: a formal analysis},
booktitle = {Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Predictive Models
in Software Engineering},
year = {2011},
pages = {12},
organization = {ACM},
abstract = {Background. The bug assignment problem is the problem of triaging
new bug reports to the most qualified developer. The qualified developer
is the one who has enough knowledge in a specific area that is relevant
to the reported bug. In recent years, bug triaging has received a
considerable amount of attention from researchers. In previous work,
bugs were represented as vectors of terms extracted from the bug
reports' description. Once the bugs are represented as vectors in
the terms space, traditional machine learning techniques are employed
for the bug assignment. Most of the previous algorithms are marred
by low accuracy values. Aims. This paper formulates the bug assignment
problem as a classification task, and then examines the impact of
several term selection approaches on the classification effectiveness.
Method. Three variants selection methods that are based on the Log
Odds Ratio (LOR) score are compared against methods that are based
on the Information Gain (IG) score and Latent Semantic Analysis (LSA).
The main difference in the methods that are based on the LOR score
is in the process of selecting the terms. Results. Term selection
techniques that are based on the Log Odds Ratio achieved up to 30%
improvement in the precision and up to 5% higher in recall compared
to other term selection methods such as Latent Semantic Analysis
and Information Gain. Conclusions. Experimental results showed that
the effectiveness of bug assignment methods is directly affected
by the selected terms that are used in the classification methods.},
problemaddressed = {change request assignment},
studytype = {validation research}
}
@INPROCEEDINGS{Hosseini2012,
author = {Hadi Hosseini and Raymond Nguyen and Michael W. Godfrey},
title = {A Market-Based Bug Allocation Mechanism Using Predictive Bug Lifetimes},
booktitle = {Proceedings of the 16th European Conference on Software Maintenance
and Reengineering (CSMR'2012)},
year = {2012},
pages = {149-158},
abstract = {Bug assignment in large software projects is typically a time-consuming
and tedious task, effective assignment requires that bug triagers
hold significant contextual information about both the reported bugs
and the pool of available developers. In this paper, we propose an
auction-based multiagent mechanism for assigning bugs to developers
that is intended to minimize backlogs and overall bug lifetime. In
this approach, developers and triagers are both modeled as intelligent
software agents working on behalf of individuals in a multiagent
environment. Upon receiving a bug report, triager agents auction
off the bug and collect the requests. Developer agents compute their
bids as a function of the developer's profile, preferences, current
schedule of assigned bugs, and estimated time-to-fix of the bug.
This value is then sent to the triager agent for the final decision.
We use the Eclipse and Firefox bug repositories to validate our approach,
our studies suggest that the proposed auction-based multiagent mechanism
can improve the bug assignment process compared to currently practised
methods. In particular, we found a 16% improvement in the number
of fixed bugs compared to the historic data, based on a sample size
of 213,000 bug reports over a period of 6 years.},
bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de},
ee = {http://doi.ieeecomputersociety.org/10.1109/CSMR.2012.25},
problemaddressed = {change request assignment},
studytype = {validation research}
}
@ARTICLE{Kagdi2012,
author = {Kagdi, Huzefa and Gethers, Malcom and Poshyvanyk, Denys and Hammad,
Maen},
title = {Assigning change requests to software developers},
journal = {Journal of Software: Evolution and Process},
year = {2012},
volume = {24},
pages = {3--33},
number = {1},
abstract = {The paper presents an approach to recommend a ranked list of expert
developers to assist in the implementation of software change requests
(e.g., bug reports and feature requests). An Information Retrieval
(IR)-based concept location technique is first used to locate source
code entities, e.g., files and classes, relevant to a given textual
description of a change request. The previous commits from version
control repositories of these entities are then mined for expert
developers. The role of the IR method in selectively reducing the
mining space is different from previous approaches that textually
index past change requests and/or commits. The approach is evaluated
on change requests from three open-source systems: ArgoUML, Eclipse,
and KOffice, across a range of accuracy criteria. The results show
that the overall accuracies of the correctly recommended developers
are between 47 and 96% for bug reports, and between 43 and 60% for
feature requests. Moreover, comparison results with two other recommendation
alternatives show that the presented approach outperforms them with
a substantial margin. Project leads or developers can use this approach
in maintenance tasks immediately after the receipt of a change request
in a free-form text. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.},
doi = {10.1002/smr.530},
issn = {2047-7481},
keywords = {concept and feature location, information retrieval, developer recommendation,
software evolution and maintenance, mining software repositories},
problemaddressed = {change request assignment},
publisher = {John Wiley \& Sons, Ltd},
source = {Google Scholar},
studytype = {validation research},
url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/smr.530}
}
@INPROCEEDINGS{Lucca2002,
author = {Giuseppe A. Di Lucca and Massimiliano Di Penta and Sara Gradara},
title = {An Approach to Classify Software Maintenance Requests},
booktitle = {Proceedings of the 18th IEEE International Conference on Software
Maintenance (ICSM'02)},
year = {2002},
pages = {93--},
organization = {University of Sannio, Italy},
publisher = {IEEE Computer Society},
cite = {44},
isbn = {0-7695-1819-2},
organizationinstitutioncompany = {University of Naples ”Federico II”,},
problemaddressed = {change request assignment},
studytype = {solution proposal},
url = {http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=876882.879773}
}
@InProceedings{Anvik2006,
Title = {Automating bug report assignment},
Author = {John Anvik},
Booktitle = {Proceedings of the 28th international conference on Software engineering (ICSE'06)},
Year = {2006},
Pages = {937--940},
__markedentry = {[yguarata:6]},
Cite = {20},
Organizationinstitutioncompany = {Department of Computer Science, University of British Columbia},
Owner = {yguarata},
Problemaddressed = {change request assignment},
Studytype = {validation research},
Timestamp = {2014.02.06}
}
@INPROCEEDINGS{Jeong2009,
author = {Gaeul Jeong and Sunghun Kim and Thomas Zimmermann},
title = {Improving bug triage with bug tossing graphs},
booktitle = {Proceedings of the 7th joint meeting of the European software engineering
conference and the ACM SIGSOFT symposium on The foundations of software
engineering (ESEC/FSE'2009)},
year = {2009},
pages = {111--120},
cite = {43},
organizationinstitutioncompany = {Seoul National University, Seoul, South Korea},
problemaddressed = {change request assignment},
studytype = {validation research}
}
@Book{Brooks1995,
Title = {The Mythical Man-Month: Essays on Software Engineering},
Author = {Frederick P. Brooks},
Publisher = {Addison-Wesley},
Year = {1995},
__markedentry = {[yguarata:6]},
Owner = {yguarata},
Timestamp = {2014.02.06}
}
@Book{Hesse-Biber2010,
author = {Sharlene Nagy Hesse-Biber},
title = {Mixed Methods Research - Mixing Theory and Practice},
publisher = {The Guilford Press},
year = {2010},
isbn = {9781606232590}
}
@INPROCEEDINGS{Rahman2009,
author = {Md. Mainur Rahman and Gunther Ruhe and Thomas Zimmermann},
title = {Optimized assignment of developers for fixing bugs an initial evaluation
for eclipse projects},
booktitle = {Proceedings of the 2009 3rd International Symposium on Empirical
Software Engineering and Measurement (ESEM'2009)},
year = {2009},
pages = {439--442},
cite = {6},
organizationinstitutioncompany = {Department of Computer Science University of Calgary Calgary, Canada},
problemaddressed = {change request assignment},
studytype = {validation research}
}
@InProceedings{CavalcantiEASE2013,
Title = {{Towards Understanding Software Change Request Assignment: A survey with practitioners}},
Author = {Yguaratã Cerqueira Cavalcanti and Paulo Anselmo Da Mota Silveira Neto and Ivan Do Carmo Machado and Eduardo Santana de Almeida and Silvio Romero de Lemos Meira},
Booktitle = {{Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering (EASE'2013)}},
Year = {2013},
Month = {April},
Pages = {195--206},
__markedentry = {[yguarata:6]},
Doi = {10.1145/2460999.2461028},
ISBN = {978-1-4503-1848-8},
Owner = {yguarata},
Timestamp = {2014.02.06}
}
@Article{CavalcantiJSEP2013,
Title = {{Challenges and Opportunities for Software Change Request Repositories: a systematic mapping study}},
Author = {Yguaratã Cerqueira Cavalcanti and Paulo Anselmo da Mota Silveira Neto and Ivan do Carmo Machado and Tassio Ferreira Vale and Eduardo Santana de Almeida and Silvio Romero de Lemos Meira},
Journal = {Journal of Software: Evolution and Process},
Year = {2013},
Note = {Online first},
__markedentry = {[yguarata:6]},
Doi = {10.1002/smr.1639},
Owner = {yguarata},
Timestamp = {2014.02.06}
}
@Article{Lehman1980,
Title = {Programs, life cycles, and laws of software evolution},
Author = {M.M. Lehman},
Journal = {Proceedings of the IEEE},
Year = {1980},
Month = {sept.},
Number = {9},
Pages = { 1060 - 1076},
Volume = {68},
__markedentry = {[yguarata:6]},
Owner = {yguarata},
Timestamp = {2014.02.06}
}