Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Measurement and Impact Factors of Speed of Reviews and Integration in Continuous Software Engineering Cover

Measurement and Impact Factors of Speed of Reviews and Integration in Continuous Software Engineering

Foundations of Computing and Decision Sciences
Volume 43 (2018): Issue 4 (December 2018)
By: Miroslaw Staron,  Wilhelm Meding,  Ola Söder and  Magnus Bäck  
Open Access
|Dec 2018

References

  1. [1] Alleman G. B., Henderson M., and Seggelke R. Making agile development work in a government contracting environment-measuring velocity with earned value. In Agile Development Conference, 2003. ADC 2003. Proceedings of the, pages 114–119. IEEE, 2003.10.1109/ADC.2003.1231460
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  2. [2] Baum T., Liskin O., Niklas K., and Schneider K. Factors influencing code review processes in industry. In Proceedings of the 2016 24th ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Foundations of Software Engineering, pages 85–96. ACM, 2016.10.1145/2950290.2950323
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  3. [3] Beller M., Bacchelli A., Zaidman A., and Juergens E. Modern code reviews in open-source projects: Which problems do they fix? In Proceedings of the 11th working conference on mining software repositories, pages 202–211. ACM, 2014.10.1145/2597073.2597082
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  4. [4] Blackburn J. D., Scudder G. D., and Van Wassenhove L. N. Improving speed and productivity of software development: a global survey of software developers. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 22(12):875–885, 1996.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  5. [5] Bosch J. Continuous Software Engineering. Springer, 2014.10.1007/978-3-319-11283-1
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  6. [6] Bosch J. Speed, data, and ecosystems: The future of software engineering. IEEE Software, 33(1):82–88, 2016.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  7. [7] Choi J. The science behind why jeff bezos’s two-pizza team rule works, 2014.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  8. [8] Coelho E. and Basu A. E ort estimation in agile software development using story points. International Journal of Applied Information Systems (IJAIS), 3(7), 2012.10.5120/ijais12-450574
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  9. [9] Cohn M. User stories applied: For agile software development. Addison-Wesley Professional, 2004.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  10. [10] Cohn M. Agile estimating and planning. Pearson Education, 2005.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  11. [11] Coskun H. Cognitive stimulation with convergent and divergent thinking exercises in brainwriting: Incubation, sequence priming, and group context. Small group research, 36(4):466–498, 2005.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  12. [12] Fagan M. Design and code inspections to reduce errors in program development, IBM Systems Journal, vol. 15, 1976.10.1147/sj.153.0182
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  13. [13] Hüttermann M. DevOps for developers. Apress, 2012.10.1007/978-1-4302-4570-4
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  14. [14] Jaspan C., Jorde M., Knight A., Sadowski C., Smith E. K., Winter C., and Murphy-Hill E. Advantages and disadvantages of a monolithic repository: a case study at Google. In Proceedings of the 40th International Conference on Software Engineering: Software Engineering in Practice, pages 225–234. ACM, 2018.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  15. [15] Kemerer C. F. and Paulk M. C. The impact of design and code reviews on software quality: An empirical study based on psp data. IEEE transactions on software engineering, 35(4):534–550, 2009.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  16. [16] Kononenko O., Baysal O., and Godfrey M. W. Code review quality: how developers see it. In Proceedings of the 38th International Conference on Software Engineering, pages 1028–1038. ACM, 2016.10.1145/2884781.2884840
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  17. [17] Kononenko O., Baysal O., Guerrouj L., Cao Y., and Godfrey M. W. Investigating code review quality: Do people and participation matter? In Software Maintenance and Evolution (ICSME), 2015 IEEE International Conference on, pages 111–120. IEEE, 2015.10.1109/ICSM.2015.7332457
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  18. [18] McIntosh S., Kamei Y., Adams B., and Hassan A. E. The impact of code review coverage and code review participation on software quality: A case study of the qt, vtk, and itk projects. In Proceedings of the 11th Working Conference on Mining Software Repositories, pages 192–201. ACM, 2014.10.1145/2597073.2597076
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  19. [19] Meding W. Effective monitoring of progress of agile software development teams in modern software companies: An industrial case study. In Proceedings of the 27th International Workshop on Software Measurement and 12th International Conference on Software Process and Product Measurement, IWSM Mensura ‘17, pages 23–32, New York, NY, USA, 2017. ACM.10.1145/3143434.3143449
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  20. [20] Nicolette D. Software development metrics. Manning, 2015.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  21. [21] Organization I. S. and Commission I. E. Software and systems engineering, software measurement process. Technical report, ISO/IEC, 2007.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  22. [22] Perry D. E., Porter A., Wade M. W., Votta L. G., and Perpich J. Reducing inspection interval in large-scale software development. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, (7):695–705, 2002.10.1109/TSE.2002.1019483
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  23. [23] Petersen K. A palette of lean indicators to detect waste in software maintenance: A case study. In Agile processes in software engineering and extreme programming, pages 108–122. Springer, 2012.10.1007/978-3-642-30350-0_8
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  24. [24] Porter A., Siy H., Mockus A., and Votta L. Understanding the sources of variation in software inspections. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology (TOSEM), 7(1):41–79, 1998.10.1145/268411.268421
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  25. [25] Runeson P. and Höst M. Guidelines for conducting and reporting case study research in software engineering. Empirical software engineering, 14(2):131, 2009.10.1007/s10664-008-9102-8
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  26. [26] Runeson P., Host M., Rainer A., and Regnell B. Case study research in software engineering: Guidelines and examples. John Wiley & Sons, 2012.10.1002/9781118181034
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  27. [27] Shimagaki J., Kamei Y., McIntosh S., Hassan A. E., and Ubayashi N. A study of the quality-impacting practices of modern code review at sony mobile. In Proceedings of the 38th International Conference on Software Engineering Companion, pages 212–221. ACM, 2016.10.1145/2889160.2889243
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  28. [28] Staron M. and Meding W. Monitoring bottlenecks in agile and lean software development projects–a method and its industrial use. Product-Focused Software Process Improvement, pages 3–16, 2011.10.1007/978-3-642-21843-9_3
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  29. [29] Staron M. and Meding W. Software Development Measurement Programs: Development, Management and Evolution. Springer, 2018.10.1007/978-3-319-91836-5
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  30. [30] Thongtanunam P., McIntosh S., Hassan A. E., and Iida H. Investigating code review practices in defective files: An empirical study of the qt system. In Proceedings of the 12th Working Conference on Mining Software Repositories, pages 168–179. IEEE Press, 2015.10.1109/MSR.2015.23
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  31. [31] Thongtanunam P., McIntosh S., Hassan A. E., and Iida H. Review participation in modern code review. Empirical Software Engineering, 22(2):768–817, 2017.10.1007/s10664-016-9452-6
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/fcds-2018-0015 | Journal eISSN: 2300-3405 | Journal ISSN: 0867-6356
Journal RSS Feed
Language: English
Page range: 281 - 303
Submitted on: Jun 19, 2018
Accepted on: Nov 19, 2018
Published on: Dec 31, 2018
Published by: Poznan University of Technology
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 4 issues per year
Related subjects:
Computer sciences,
Artificial intelligence,
Software development

© 2018 Miroslaw Staron, Wilhelm Meding, Ola Söder, Magnus Bäck, published by Poznan University of Technology
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.

Previous articleVolume 43 (2018): Issue 4 (December 2018)Next article