Upload
yujuan-jiang
View
134
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Tracing Back the History of Commits in Low-tech Reviewing Environments
Yujuan Jiang, Bram Adams, Daniel German and Foutse Khomh
1
3
linux-usb
linux-scsi
lkml
subsystemmaintainer1
subsystemmaintainer1
Reviewing: patch Integration: commit
maintainer Linus Torvalds
Email-based Reviewing Environment
contributor
contributor
contributor
Data Collection
Emails from mailing listsCommits from Git Repo
5
Linking
CCFinder (token-level)
+/- line-based (line-level)
Checksum-based (Chunk-level)
Research Questions
RQ1: Can commits be linked accurately to emails containing the corresponding patch version?
RQ2: Can emails containing different patch versions be linked accurately to each other?
RQ3: What are the characteristics of the reviewing history in a low-tech reviewing environment?
6
Case Study Result
RQ1: Can commits be linked accurately to emails containing the corresponding patch version?
RQ2: Can emails containing different patch versions be linked accurately to each other?
RQ3: What are the characteristics of the reviewing history in a low-tech reviewing environment?
10
Plus/Minus line technique has highest F-measure to link email patch to commit
Table1: statistics of email-commit links
+/- line result has highest relative
recall
checksum result has highest precision
+/- result has highest F-measure
Research Questions
RQ1: be linked accurately to emails containing the corresponding patch version?
RQ2: Can emails containing different patch versions be linked accurately to each other?
RQ3: What are the characteristics of the reviewing history in a low-tech reviewing environment?
13
Checksum technique has highest F-measure to link email to email
Table2: statistics of email-email links
checksum result has highest precision
+/- line result has highest relative recall
+/- line result has highest F-measure
Research Questions
RQ1: be linked accurately to emails containing the corresponding patch version?
RQ2: containing different patch versions be linked accurately to each other?
RQ3: What are the characteristics of the reviewing history in a low-tech reviewing environment?
16