nach oben

Empirical Software Engineering

Erschienen in:

07.05.2016

An empirical study of supplementary patches in open source projects

verfasst von: Jihun Park, Miryung Kim, Doo-Hwan Bae

Erschienen in: Empirical Software Engineering | Ausgabe 1/2017

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

Developers occasionally make more than one patch to fix a bug. The related patches sometimes are intentionally separated, but unintended omission errors require supplementary patches. Several change recommendation systems have been suggested based on clone analysis, structural dependency, and historical change coupling in order to reduce or prevent incomplete patches. However, very few studies have examined the reason that incomplete patches occur and how real-world omission errors could be reduced. This paper systematically studies a group of bugs that were fixed more than once in open source projects in order to understand the characteristics of incomplete patches. Our study on Eclipse JDT core, Eclipse SWT, Mozilla, and Equinox p2 showed that a significant portion of the resolved bugs require more than one attempt to fix. Compared to single-fix bugs, the multi-fix bugs did not have a lower quality of bug reports, but more attribute changes (i.e., cc’ed developers or title) were made to the multi-fix bugs than to the single-fix bugs. Multi-fix bugs are more likely to have high severity levels than single-fix bugs. Hence, more developers have participated in discussions about multi-fix bugs compared to single-fix bugs. Multi-fix bugs take more time to resolve than single-fix bugs do. Incomplete patches are longer and more scattered, and they are related to more files than regular patches are. Our manual inspection showed that the causes of incomplete patches were diverse, including missed porting updates, incorrect handling of conditional statements, and incomplete refactoring. Our investigation showed that only 7 % to 17 % of supplementary patches had content similar to their initial patches, which implies that supplementary patch locations cannot be predicted by code clone analysis alone. Furthermore, 16 % to 46 % of supplementary patches were beyond the scope of the immediate structural dependency of their initial patch locations. Historical co-change patterns also showed low precision in predicting supplementary patch locations. Code clones, structural dependencies, and historical co-change analyses predicted different supplementary patch locations, and there was little overlap between them. Combining these analyses did not cover all supplementary patch locations. The present study investigates the characteristics of incomplete patches and multi-fix bugs, which have not been systematically examined in previous research. We reveal that predicting supplementary patch is a difficult problem that existing change recommendation approaches could not cover. New type of approaches should be developed and validated on a supplementary patch data set, which developers failed to make the complete patches at once in practice.

Vorheriger Artikel Stochastic actor-oriented modeling for studying homophily and social influence in OSS projects

Nächster Artikel A stability assessment of solution adaptation techniques for analogy-based software effort estimation

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich

They currently use the GIT (Eclipse sub-projects) and Mercurial (Mozilla) repositories

http://cvs2svn.tigris.org/

http://subgit.com/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coleman-Liau_index

In the remainder of the paper, we will use S-fix and M-fix as abbreviation of single-fix bugs and multi-fix bugs, respectively, in tables because space is limited.

Additional examples are provided in the Appendix

https://projects.apache.org/

http://www.jboss.org/projects/

https://spring.io/projects

http://se.kaist.ac.kr/jhpark

An L, Khomh F, Adams B (2014) Supplementary bug fixes vs. re-opened bugs. In: 2014 IEEE 14th international working conference on source code analysis and manipulation (SCAM). IEEE, pp 205–214

Andersen J, Lawall J (2008) Generic patch inference. In: ASE ’08: Proceedings of the 23rd IEEE/ACM international conference on automated software engineering. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, pp 337–346. doi:10.1109/ASE.2008.44

Barnett M, Bird C, Brunet J, Lahiri S K (2015) Helping developers help themselves: automatic decomposition of code review changesets. In: 2015 IEEE/ACM 37th IEEE international conference on software engineering (ICSE), vol 1. IEEE, pp 134–144

Bettenburg N, Shang W, Ibrahim W M, Adams B, Zou Y, Hassan A E (2012) An empirical study on inconsistent changes to code clones at the release level. Sci Comput Program 77(6):760–776CrossRef

Bird C, Bachmann A, Aune E, Duffy J, Bernstein A, Filkov V, Devanbu P (2009) Fair and balanced?: bias in bug-fix datasets. In: ESEC/FSE ’09: Proceedings of the the 7th joint meeting of the European software engineering conference and the ACM SIGSOFT symposium on the foundations of software engineering. ACM, New York, pp 121–130. doi:10.1145/1595696.1595716

Cliff N (1996) Ordinal methods for behavioral data analysis. Routledge, Evanston

Čubranić D, Murphy GC (2003) Hipikat: recommending pertinent software development artifacts. In: Proceedings of the 25th international conference on software engineering. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, ICSE ’03, pp 408–418. http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=776816.776866

Duala-Ekoko E, Robillard MP (2007) Tracking code clones in evolving software. In: ICSE ’07: Proceedings of the 29th international conference on software engineering. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, pp 158–167. doi:10.1109/ICSE.2007.90

Eyolfson J, Tan L, Lam P (2011) Do time of day and developer experience affect commit bugginess? In: Proceedings of the 8th working conference on mining software repositories. ACM, pp 153–162

Fischer M, Pinzger M, Gall H (2003) Populating a release history database from version control and bug tracking systems. In: ICSM ’03: Proceedings of the international conference on software maintenance. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, p 23

Fry ZP, Weimer W (2010) A human study of fault localization accuracy. In: ICSM ’10: Proceedings of the 2010 IEEE international conference on software maintenance. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, pp 1–10. doi:10.1109/ICSM.2010.5609691

Gamma E, Helm R, Johnson R, Vlissides JM (1994) Design patterns: elements of reusable object-oriented software. Addison-Wesley Professional

Görg C, Weißgerber P (2005) Error detection by refactoring reconstruction. In: MSR ’05: Proceedings of the 2005 international workshop on mining software repositories. ACM Press, New York, pp 1–5. doi:10.1145/1083142.1083148

Grissom RJ, Kim JJ (2005) Effect sizes for research: a broad practical approach. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers

Gu Z, Barr E, Hamilton D, Su Z (2010) Has the bug really been fixed? In: 2010 ACM/IEEE 32nd international conference on software engineering, vol 1, pp 55–64. doi:10.1145/1806799.1806812

Hassan AE (2009) Predicting faults using the complexity of code changes. In: ICSE ’09: Proceedings of the 31st international conference on software engineering, IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, pp 78–88. doi:10.1109/ICSE.2009.5070510

Hassan AE, Holt RC (2004) Predicting change propagation in software systems. In: ICSM ’04: Proceedings of the 20th IEEE international conference on software maintenance. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, pp 284–293. doi:10.1109/ICSM.2004.1357812

Herzig K, Zeller A (2013) The impact of tangled code changes. In: 2013 10th IEEE working conference on mining software repositories (MSR). IEEE, pp 121–130

Herzig K, Just S, Zeller A (2013) It’s not a bug, it’s a feature: how misclassification impacts bug prediction. In: Proceedings of the 2013 international conference on software engineering. IEEE Press, pp 392–401

Hooimeijer P, Weimer W (2007) Modeling bug report quality. In: Proceedings of the twenty-second IEEE/ACM international conference on automated software engineering. ACM, pp 34–43

Jiang L, Misherghi G, Su Z, Glondu S (2007) Deckard: scalable and accurate tree-based detection of code clones. In: Proceedings of the 29th international conference on software engineering. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, ICSE ’07, pp 96–105. doi:10.1109/ICSE.2007.30

Kamiya T, Kusumoto S, Inoue K (2002) CCFinder: a multilinguistic token-based code clone detection system for large scale source code. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 28 (7):654–670. doi:10.1109/TSE.2002.1019480 CrossRef

Kim M, Notkin D (2009) Discovering and representing systematic code changes. In: ICSE ’09: Proceedings of the 2009 IEEE 31st international conference on software engineering. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, pp 309–319. doi:10.1109/ICSE.2009.5070531

Kim S, Whitehead EJ Jr, Zhang Y (2008) Classifying software changes: clean or buggy? IEEE Trans Softw Eng 34(2):181–196. doi:10.1109/TSE.2007.70773 CrossRef

Kim M, Sinha S, Go Andrg C, Shah H, Harrold M, Nanda M (2010) Automated bug neighborhood analysis for identifying incomplete bug fixes. In: ICST ’10: Proceedings of the third international conference on software testing, verification and validation. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, pp 383–392. doi:10.1109/ICST.2010.63

Kim M, Cai D, Kim S (2011) An empirical investigation into the role of refactorings during software evolution. In: ICSE’ 11: Proceedings of the 2011 ACM and IEEE 33rd international conference on software engineering. ACM, New York, pp 151–160. doi:10.1145/1985793.1985815

Loh A, Kim M (2010) Lsdiff: a program differencing tool to identify systematic structural differences. In: Proceedings of the 32nd ACM/IEEE international conference on software engineering—volume 2. ACM, New York, ICSE ’10, pp 263–266. doi:10.1145/1810295.1810348

Meng N, Kim M, McKinley KS (2011) Systematic editing: generating program transformations from an example. In: Proceedings of the 32nd ACM SIGPLAN conference on programming language design and implementation. ACM, New York, PLDI ’11, pp 329–342. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1993498.1993537

Meng N, Kim M, McKinley KS (2013) Lase: locating and applying systematic edits by learning from examples. In: Proceedings of the 2013 international conference on software engineering. IEEE Press, Piscataway, ICSE ’13, pp 502–511. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2486788.2486855

Mockus A, Votta LG (2000) Identifying reasons for software changes using historic databases. In: ICSM ’00: Proceedings of the international conference on software maintenance. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, pp 120–130. doi:10.1109/ICSM.2000.883028

Mockus A, Weiss DM (2000) Predicting risk of software changes. Bell Labs Tech J 5(2):169–180CrossRef

Nagappan N, Zeller A, Zimmermann T, Herzig K, Murphy B (2010) Change bursts as defect predictors. In: Proceedings of the 2010 IEEE 21st international symposium on software reliability engineering. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, ISSRE ’10, pp 309–318. doi:10.1109/ISSRE.2010.25

Nguyen TT, Nguyen HA, Pham NH, Al-Kofahi JM, Nguyen TN (2009) Clone-aware configuration management. In: ASE ’09: Proceedings of the 2009 IEEE/ACM international conference on automated software engineering. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, pp 123–134. doi:10.1109/ASE.2009.90

Nguyen TT, Nguyen HA, Pham NH, Al-Kofahi J, Nguyen TN (2010) Recurring bug fixes in object-oriented programs. In: ICSE ’10: Proceedings of the 32nd ACM/IEEE international conference on software engineering. ACM, New York, pp 315–324. doi:10.1145/1806799.1806847

Padioleau Y, Lawall J, Hansen RR, Muller G (2008) Documenting and automating collateral evolutions in linux device drivers. In: Eurosys ’08: Proceedings of the 3rd ACM SIGOPS/EuroSys European conference on computer systems 2008. ACM, New York, pp 247–260. doi:10.1145/1352592.1352618

Park J, Kim M, Ray B, Bae DH (2012) An empirical study of supplementary bug fixes. In: MSR ’12: 9th IEEE working conference on mining software repositories. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, pp 40–49. doi:10.1109/MSR.2012.6224298

Park J, Kim M, Bae DH (2014) An empirical study on reducing omission errors in practice. In: Proceedings of the 29th ACM/IEEE international conference on automated software engineering. ACM, pp 121–126

Pham NH, Nguyen HA, Nguyen TT, Al-Kofahi JM, Nguyen TN (2009) Complete and accurate clone detection in graph-based models. In: Proceedings of the 31st international conference on software engineering. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, ICSE ’09, pp 276–286. doi:10.1109/ICSE.2009.5070528

Purushothaman R, Perry DE (2005) Toward understanding the rhetoric of small source code changes. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 31(6):511–526. doi:10.1109/TSE.2005.74 CrossRef

Rahman F, Devanbu P (2011) Ownership, experience and defects: a fine-grained study of authorship. In: Proceedings of the 33rd international conference on software engineering. ACM, pp 491–500

Rahman F, Bird C, Devanbu P (2012) Clones: what is that smell? Empir Softw Eng 17(4–5):503–530CrossRef

Ray B, Kim M (2012a) A case study of cross-system porting in forked projects. In: Proceedings of the ACM SIGSOFT 20th international symposium on the foundations of software engineering. ACM, p 53

Ray B, Kim M (2012b) A case study of cross-system porting in forked projects. In: Proceedings of the ACM SIGSOFT 20th international symposium on the foundations of software engineering. ACM, New York, FSE ’12, pp 53:1–53:11. doi:10.1145/2393596.2393659

Robillard MP (2005) Automatic generation of suggestions for program investigation. In: ESEC/FSE-13: Proceedings of the 10th European software engineering conference held jointly with 13th ACM SIGSOFT international symposium on foundations of software engineering. ACM, New York, pp 11–20. doi:10.1145/1081706.1081711

Shannon CE (1949) Communication theory of secrecy systems*. Bell Syst Tech J 28(4):656–715MathSciNetCrossRefMATH

Shihab E, Ihara A, Kamei Y, Ibrahim WM, Ohira M, Adams B, Hassan AE, Ki M (2013) Studying re-opened bugs in open source software. Empir Softw Eng 18(5):1005–1042CrossRef

Tao Y, Kim S (2015) Partitioning composite code changes to facilitate code review. In: 2015 IEEE/ACM 12th working conference on mining software repositories (MSR). IEEE, pp 180–190

Viera AJ, Garrett JM, et al. (2005) Understanding interobserver agreement: the kappa statistic. Fam Med 37(5):360–363

Wang X, Lo D, Cheng J, Zhang L, Mei H, Yu JX (2010) Matching dependence-related queries in the system dependence graph. In: ASE ’10: Proceedings of the IEEE/ACM international conference on Automated software engineering. ACM, New York, ASE ’10, pp 457–466. doi:10.1145/1858996.1859091

Yin Z, Yuan D, Zhou Y, Pasupathy S, Bairavasundaram L (2011) How do fixes become bugs? In: ESEC/FSE ’11: Proceedings of the 19th ACM SIGSOFT symposium and the 13th European conference on Foundations of software engineering. ACM, New York. doi:10.1145/2025113.2025121

Ying A TT, Murphy GC, Ng R, Chu-Carroll M (2004) Predicting source code changes by mining change history. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 30(9):574–586CrossRef

Zhang X, Tallam S, Gupta N, Gupta R (2007) Towards locating execution omission errors. In: PLDI ’07: Proceedings of the 2007 ACM SIGPLAN conference on programming language design and implementation. ACM, New York, pp 415–424. doi:10.1145/1250734.1250782

Zimmermann T, Weisgerber P, Diehl S, Zeller A (2004) Mining version histories to guide software changes. In: ICSE ’04: Proceedings of the 26th international conference on software engineering. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, pp 563–572. doi:10.1109/ICSE.2004.1317478

Zimmermann T, Weißgerber P, Diehl S, Zeller A (2005) Mining version histories to guide software changes. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 31(6):429–445. doi:10.1109/TSE.2005.72 CrossRef

Zimmermann T, Premraj R, Bettenburg N, Just S, Schroter A, Weiss C (2010) What makes a good bug report? IEEE Trans Softw Eng 36(5):618–643CrossRef

Zimmermann T, Nagappan N, Guo PJ, Murphy B (2012) Characterizing and predicting which bugs get reopened. In: 2012 34th international conference on software engineering (ICSE). IEEE, pp 1074–1083

Titel: An empirical study of supplementary patches in open source projects
verfasst von: Jihun Park
Miryung Kim
Doo-Hwan Bae
Publikationsdatum: 07.05.2016
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: Empirical Software Engineering / Ausgabe 1/2017
Print ISSN: 1382-3256
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-7616
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10664-016-9432-x

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2017

Defect propagation at the project-level: results and a post-hoc analysis on inspection efficiency

FOREPOST: finding performance problems automatically with feedback-directed learning software testing

A stability assessment of solution adaptation techniques for analogy-based software effort estimation

Zen-ReqOptimizer: a search-based approach for requirements assignment optimization

Why and how developers fork what from whom in GitHub

Learning to rank code examples for code search engines

Premium Partner