Does every inspection need a meeting?
SIGSOFT '93 Proceedings of the 1st ACM SIGSOFT symposium on Foundations of software engineering
Understanding the effects of developer activities on inspection interval
ICSE '97 Proceedings of the 19th international conference on Software engineering
An Experiment to Assess the Cost-Benefits of Code Inspections in Large Scale Software Development
IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering
Understanding the sources of variation in software inspections
ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology (TOSEM)
Communications of the ACM
IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering
A case study of open source software development: the Apache server
Proceedings of the 22nd international conference on Software engineering
Bugs as deviant behavior: a general approach to inferring errors in systems code
SOSP '01 Proceedings of the eighteenth ACM symposium on Operating systems principles
The Cathedral and the Bazaar
Reducing inspection interval in large-scale software development
IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering
The Apache HTTP Server Project
IEEE Internet Computing
The FreeBSD Project: A Replication Case Study of Open Source Development
IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering
Producing Open Source Software: How to Run a Successful Free Software Project
Producing Open Source Software: How to Run a Successful Free Software Project
Proceedings of the 2006 international workshop on Mining software repositories
Patch Review Processes in Open Source Software Development Communities: A Comparative Case Study
HICSS '07 Proceedings of the 40th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences
Males' and Females' Script Debugging Strategies
IS-EUD '09 Proceedings of the 2nd International Symposium on End-User Development
The role of patch review in software evolution: an analysis of the mozilla firefox
Proceedings of the joint international and annual ERCIM workshops on Principles of software evolution (IWPSE) and software evolution (Evol) workshops
Information needs in bug reports: improving cooperation between developers and users
Proceedings of the 2010 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work
On the central role of mailing lists in open source projects: an exploratory study
JSAI-isAI'09 Proceedings of the 2009 international conference on New frontiers in artificial intelligence
Understanding broadcast based peer review on open source software projects
Proceedings of the 33rd International Conference on Software Engineering
Improving open source software patch contribution process: methods and tools
Proceedings of the 33rd International Conference on Software Engineering
Agile development with security engineering activities
Proceedings of the 2011 International Conference on Software and Systems Process
An industrial study on the risk of software changes
Proceedings of the ACM SIGSOFT 20th International Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering
Peer code review in open source communitiesusing reviewboard
Proceedings of the ACM 4th annual workshop on Evaluation and usability of programming languages and tools
Expectations, outcomes, and challenges of modern code review
Proceedings of the 2013 International Conference on Software Engineering
Informing development decisions: from data to information
Proceedings of the 2013 International Conference on Software Engineering
Gerrit software code review data from Android
Proceedings of the 10th Working Conference on Mining Software Repositories
Will my patch make it? and how fast?: case study on the Linux kernel
Proceedings of the 10th Working Conference on Mining Software Repositories
Communication in open source software development mailing lists
Proceedings of the 10th Working Conference on Mining Software Repositories
Convergent contemporary software peer review practices
Proceedings of the 2013 9th Joint Meeting on Foundations of Software Engineering
Key factors for adopting inner source
ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology (TOSEM)
Hi-index | 0.00 |
Peer review is seen as an important quality assurance mechanism in both industrial development and the open source software (OSS) community. The techniques for performing inspections have been well studied in industry; in OSS development, peer reviews are less well understood. We examine the two peer review techniques used by the successful, mature Apache server project: review-then-commit and commit-then-review. Using archival records of email discussion and version control repositories, we construct a series of metrics that produces measures similar to those used in traditional inspection experiments. Specifically, we measure the frequency of review, the level of participation in reviews, the size of the artifact under review, the calendar time to perform a review, and the number of reviews that find defects. We provide a comparison of the two Apache review techniques as well as a comparison of Apache review to inspection in an industrial project. We conclude that Apache reviews can be described as (1) early, frequent reviews (2) of small, independent, complete contributions (3) conducted asynchronously by a potentially large, but actually small, group of self-selected experts (4) leading to an efficient and effective peer review technique.