%0 Journal Article %J IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering %D 2017 %T Process Aspects and Social Dynamics of Contemporary Code Review: Insights from Open Source Development and Industrial Practice at Microsoft %A Bosu, Amiangshu %A Carver, Jeffrey C. %A Christian Bird %A Orbeck, Jonathan %A Chockley, Christopher %K code review %K commercial projects %K peer impressions %K Survey %X Many open source and commercial developers practice contemporary code review, a lightweight, informal, tool-based code review process. To better understand this process and its benefits, we gathered information about code review practices via surveys of open source software developers and developers from Microsoft. The results of our analysis suggest that developers spend approximately 10-15 percent of their time in code reviews, with the amount of effort increasing with experience. Developers consider code review important, stating that in addition to finding defects, code reviews offer other benefits, including knowledge sharing, community building, and maintaining code quality. The quality of the code submitted for review helps reviewers form impressions about their teammates, which can influence future collaborations. We found a large amount of similarity between the Microsoft and OSS respondents. One interesting difference is that while OSS respondents view code review as an important method of impression formation, Microsoft respondents found knowledge dissemination to be more important. Finally, we found little difference between distributed and co-located Microsoft teams. Our findings identify the following key areas that warrant focused research: 1) exploring the non-technical benefits of code reviews, 2) helping developers in articulating review comments, and 3) assisting reviewers’ program comprehension during code reviews. %B IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering %V 43 %P 56 - 75 %8 1/2017 %U https://amiangshu.com/papers/CodeReview-TSE-2016.pdf %N 1 %! IIEEE Trans. Software Eng. %R 10.1109/TSE.2016.2576451 %> https://flosshub.org/sites/flosshub.org/files/CodeReview-TSE-2016.pdf %0 Conference Proceedings %B 2017 IEEE/ACM 39th International Conference on Software Engineering %D 2017 %T Understanding the Impressions, Motivations, and Barriers of One Time Code Contributors to FLOSS Projects: A Survey %A Amanda Lee %A Carver, Jeffrey C. %A Bosu, Amiangshu %K newcomers %K One Time Contributors %K Qualitative Research %K Survey %X Successful Free/Libre Open Source Software (FLOSS) projects must attract and retain high-quality talent. Researchers have invested considerable effort in the study of core and peripheral FLOSS developers. To this point, one critical subset of developers that have not been studied are One-Time code Contributors (OTC) – those that have had exactly one patch accepted. To understand why OTCs have not contributed another patch and provide guidance to FLOSS projects on retaining OTCs, this study seeks to understand the impressions, motivations, and barriers experienced by OTCs. We conducted an online survey of OTCs from 23 popular FLOSS projects. Based on the 184 responses received, we observed that OTCs generally have positive impressions of their FLOSS project and are driven by a variety of motivations. Most OTCs primarily made contributions to fix bugs that impeded their work and did not plan on becoming long term contributors. Furthermore, OTCs encounter a number of barriers that prevent them from continuing to contribute to the project. Based on our findings, there are some concrete actions FLOSS projects can take to increase the chances of converting OTCs into long-term contributors. %B 2017 IEEE/ACM 39th International Conference on Software Engineering %P 187-197 %8 05/2017 %0 Book Section %B Open Source Software: Mobile Open Source Technologies %D 2014 %T How Do Social Interaction Networks Influence Peer Impressions Formation? A Case Study %A Bosu, Amiangshu %A Carver, JeffreyC. %E Corral, Luis %E Sillitti, Alberto %E Succi, Giancarlo %E Vlasenko, Jelena %E Wasserman, AnthonyI. %K COLLABORATION %K FOSS %K open source %K OSS %K social network analysis %X Due to their lack of physical interaction, Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) participants form impressions of their teammates largely based on sociotechnical mechanisms including: code commits, code reviews, mailing-lists, and bug comments. These mechanisms may have different effects on peer impression formation. This paper describes a social network analysis of the WikiMedia project to determine which type of interaction has the most favorable characteristics for impressions formation. The results suggest that due to lower centralization, high interactivity, and high degree of interactions between participants, the code review interactions have the most favorable characteristics to support impression formation among FOSS participants. %B Open Source Software: Mobile Open Source Technologies %S IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology %I Springer Berlin Heidelberg %V 427 %P 31-40 %@ 978-3-642-55127-7 %U http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-55128-4_4 %R 10.1007/978-3-642-55128-4_4 %0 Book Section %B Open Source Software: Mobile Open Source Technologies %D 2014 %T When Are OSS Developers More Likely to Introduce Vulnerable Code Changes? A Case Study %A Bosu, Amiangshu %A Carver, JeffreyC. %A Hafiz, Munawar %A Hilley, Patrick %A Janni, Derek %E Corral, Luis %E Sillitti, Alberto %E Succi, Giancarlo %E Vlasenko, Jelena %E Wasserman, AnthonyI. %K FOSS %K open source %K OSS %K security %K vulnerability %X We analyzed peer code review data of the Android Open Source Project (AOSP) to understand whether code changes that introduce security vulnerabilities, referred to as vulnerable code changes (VCC), occur at certain intervals. Using a systematic manual analysis process, we identified 60 VCCs. Our results suggest that AOSP developers were more likely to write VCCs prior to AOSP releases, while during the post-release period they wrote fewer VCCs. %B Open Source Software: Mobile Open Source Technologies %S IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology %I Springer Berlin Heidelberg %V 427 %P 234-236 %@ 978-3-642-55127-7 %U http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-55128-4_37 %R 10.1007/978-3-642-55128-4_37