Deciphering Refactoring Branch Dynamics in Modern Code Review: An Empirical Study on Qt

Fuente: arXiv
Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: AlOmar, Eman Abdullah
Format: Preprint
Published: 2024
Subjects:
Online Access:
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1866929691799060480
author AlOmar, Eman Abdullah
author_facet AlOmar, Eman Abdullah
contents Context: Modern code review is a widely employed technique in both industrial and open-source projects, serving to enhance software quality, share knowledge, and ensure compliance with coding standards and guidelines. While code review is extensively studied for its general challenges, best practices, outcomes, and socio-technical aspects, little attention has been paid to how refactoring is reviewed and what developers prioritize when reviewing refactored code in the Refactor branch. Objective: The goal is to understand the review process for refactoring changes in the Refactor branch and to identify what developers care about when reviewing code in this branch. Method: In this study, we present a quantitative and qualitative examination to understand the main criteria developers use to decide whether to accept or reject refactored code submissions and identify the challenges inherent in this process. Results: Analyzing 2,154 refactoring and non-refactoring reviews across Qt open-source projects, we find that reviews involving refactoring from the Refactor branch take significantly less time to resolve in terms of code review efforts. Additionally, documentation of developer intent is notably sparse within the Refactor branch compared to other branches. Furthermore, through thematic analysis of a substantial sample of refactoring code review discussions, we construct a comprehensive taxonomy consisting of 12 refactoring review criteria.
format Preprint
id arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2410_04678
institution arXiv
publishDate 2024
record_format arxiv
spellingShingle Deciphering Refactoring Branch Dynamics in Modern Code Review: An Empirical Study on Qt
AlOmar, Eman Abdullah
Software Engineering
Context: Modern code review is a widely employed technique in both industrial and open-source projects, serving to enhance software quality, share knowledge, and ensure compliance with coding standards and guidelines. While code review is extensively studied for its general challenges, best practices, outcomes, and socio-technical aspects, little attention has been paid to how refactoring is reviewed and what developers prioritize when reviewing refactored code in the Refactor branch. Objective: The goal is to understand the review process for refactoring changes in the Refactor branch and to identify what developers care about when reviewing code in this branch. Method: In this study, we present a quantitative and qualitative examination to understand the main criteria developers use to decide whether to accept or reject refactored code submissions and identify the challenges inherent in this process. Results: Analyzing 2,154 refactoring and non-refactoring reviews across Qt open-source projects, we find that reviews involving refactoring from the Refactor branch take significantly less time to resolve in terms of code review efforts. Additionally, documentation of developer intent is notably sparse within the Refactor branch compared to other branches. Furthermore, through thematic analysis of a substantial sample of refactoring code review discussions, we construct a comprehensive taxonomy consisting of 12 refactoring review criteria.
title Deciphering Refactoring Branch Dynamics in Modern Code Review: An Empirical Study on Qt
topic Software Engineering
url https://arxiv.org/abs/2410.04678