Browsing by Author "Tuna, Erdem"

Filter results by typing the first few letters
Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Bug tracking process smells in practice
    (IEEE Computer Society, 2022-05-27) Tuna, Erdem; Kovalenko, Vladimir; Tüzün, Eray
    Software teams use bug tracking (BT) tools to report and manage bugs. Each record in a bug tracking system (BTS) is a reporting entity consisting of several information fields. The contents of the reports are similar across different tracking tools, though not the same. The variation in the workflow between teams prevents defining an ideal process of running BTS. Nevertheless, there are best practices reported both in white and gray literature. Developer teams may not adopt the best practices in their BT process. This study investigates the non-compliance of developers with best practices, so-called smells, in the BT process. We mine bug reports of four projects in the BTS of JetBrains, a software company, to observe the prevalence of BT smells in an industrial setting. Also, we survey developers to see (1) if they recognize the smells, (2) their perception of the severity of the smells, and (3) the potential benefits of a BT process smell detection tool. We found that (1) smells occur, and their detection requires a solid understanding of the BT practices of the projects, (2) smell severity perception varies across smell types, and (3) developers considered that a smell detection tool would be useful for six out of the 12 smell categories. © 2022 IEEE.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemEmbargo
    Do code reviews lead to fewer code smells?
    (Elsevier Inc., 2024-09) Tuna, Erdem; Seaman, Carolyn; Tüzün, Eray
    **Context:** The code review process is conducted by software teams with various motivations. Among other goals, code reviews act as a gatekeeper for software quality. **Objective:** In this study, we explore whether code reviews have an impact on one specific aspect of software quality, software maintainability. We further extend our investigation by analyzing whether code review process quality (as evidenced by the presence of code review process smells) influences software maintainability (as evidenced by the presence of code smells). **Method:** We investigate whether smells in the code review process are related to smells in the code that was reviewed by using correlation analysis. We augment our quantitative analysis with a focus group study to learn practitioners’ opinions. **Results:** Our investigations revealed that the level of code smells neither increases nor decreases in 8 out of 10 code reviews, regardless of the quality of the code review. Contrary to our own intuition and that of the practitioners in our focus groups, we found that code review process smells have little to no correlation with the level of code smells. We identified multiple potential reasons behind the counter-intuitive results based on our focus group data. Furthermore, practitioners still believe that code reviews are helpful in improving software maintainability. **Conclusion:** Our results imply that the community should update our goals for code review practices and reevaluate those practices to align them with more relevant and modern realities.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Impact of code review process smells on code smells
    (2023-01) Tuna, Erdem
    The code review process is conducted by software teams with various motivations. Among other goals, code reviews act as a gatekeeper for software quality. Software quality comprises several aspects, maintainability (i.e., code quality) being one of them. In this study, we explore whether code review process quality (as evidenced by the presence of code review process smells) influences software maintainability (as evidenced by the presence of code smells). In other words, we investigate whether smells in the code review process are related to smells in the code that was reviewed by using correlation analysis. We augment our quantitative analysis with a focus group study to learn practitioners’ opinions. Contrary to our own intuition and that of the practitioners in our focus groups, we found that code review process smells have little to no correlation with the level of code smells. Further investigations revealed that the level of code smells neither increases nor decreases in 8 out of 10 code reviews, regardless of the quality of the code review. We identified multiple potential reasons behind the counter-intuitive results based on our focus group data. Furthermore, practitioners still believe that code reviews are helpful in improving software quality. Our results imply that the community should update our goals for code review practices and reevaluate those practices to align them with more relevant and modern realities.