计算机科学 ›› 2023, Vol. 50 ›› Issue (12): 14-23.doi: 10.11896/jsjkx.230300211

• 计算机软件 • 上一篇    下一篇

软件缺陷标题质量的实证研究

续永, 孙龙飞, 张汤浩然, 毛新军   

  1. 国防科技大学计算机学院 长沙 410073
    湖南省复杂系统软件工程重点实验室 长沙 410073
  • 收稿日期:2023-03-28 修回日期:2023-07-10 出版日期:2023-12-15 发布日期:2023-12-07
  • 通讯作者: 毛新军(xjmao@nudt.edu.cn)
  • 作者简介:(xuyong20a@nudt.edu.cn)
  • 基金资助:
    国家自然科学基金(62172426);科技部重点研发计划(2018YFB1004202)

Examining the Quality of Bug Report Titles:An Empirical Study

XU Yong, SUN Longfei, ZHANGTANG Haoran, MAO Xinjun   

  1. College of Computer Science and Technology,National University of Defense Technology,Changsha 410073,China
    Hunan Key Laboratory of Software Engineering for Complex Systems,Changsha 410073,China
  • Received:2023-03-28 Revised:2023-07-10 Online:2023-12-15 Published:2023-12-07
  • About author:XU Yong,born in 1998,postgraduate,is a student member of China Computer Federation.His main research interest is AI for software engineering.
    MAO Xinjun,born in 1970,Ph.D,professor,is a member of China Computer Federation.His main research interests include software engineering,intelligent agent theory and technology,adaptive and self-organizing systems,etc.
  • Supported by:
    National Natural Science Foundation of China(62172426) and Key Research Project of the Ministry of Science and Technology(2018YFB1004202).

摘要: 软件缺陷标题用简洁的语言描述了软件缺陷的关键信息,有助于软件开发者快速地掌握软件缺陷的梗概,进而高效地开展软件缺陷管理工作。当前诸多软件开发实践中可以发现,软件缺陷标题的质量参差不齐,存在冗长、晦涩、缺乏对关键信息的描述等问题,导致难以阅读和理解,影响了软件缺陷管理的效率和质量。因此有必要深入探究影响软件缺陷标题质量的具体因素以及当前软件缺陷标题的质量情况。文中围绕这两个方面的问题开展了定性和定量相结合的实证研究,选取190个在线文档进行定性分析以获取开发者对缺陷标题质量的需求,基于分析结果采取GQM范式构建了缺陷标题质量度量模型,并以此对GitHub中5个开源项目的1 804个软件缺陷标题进行质量问题普遍性分析。研究结果表明:1)开发者主要关注软件缺陷标题4个方面的质量需求,即简洁(110,58%)、清楚(65,34%)、提供期望信息(157,83%)和提供具体描述(67,35%);2)70%的软件缺陷标题存在不同程度的质量问题。缺乏期望信息和描述不具体是最常见的两类质量问题,42%的软件缺陷标题缺乏期望信息,24%的软件缺陷标题需要补充具体描述。文中的研究发现有助于指导报告者提交高质量的软件缺陷标题。

关键词: 缺陷标题, 度量模型, 质量问题分布, 主题分析, 软件缺陷管理

Abstract: The title of a software bug serves as a concise summary of the bug,which can help developers swiftly comprehend the bug and facilitate effective software bug management.Current software development practices reveal that the quality of bug titles varies considerably,characterized by issues such as verbosity,obscurity,and a lack of crucial information,ultimately impacting the efficiency of software bug management.To this end,this study attempt to understand which factors influence the quality of bug title and identify the current quality status.We examine 190 online documents to elicit the quality requirements of developers for bug title,construct a bug title quality measurement model using the GQM paradigm,and analyze the prevalence of quality issues in 1 804 bug titles from five open-source projects on GitHub.The findings indicate that developers primarily focus on four aspects of quality for bug titles,i.e.conciseness(110,58%),clarity(65,34%),description of the core idea of the bug(157,83%),and accurate descriptions(67,35%).Approximately 70% of bug titles exhibit varying degrees of quality issues,with a lack of crucial information and inaccurate descriptions being the most common issues.Specifically,42% of bug titles lack information expected by developers,and 24% require being rewritten accurately.The study can offer guidance for reporters seeking to submit high-quality bug titles.

Key words: Title of bug report, Measurement model, Distribution of quality issues, Theme analysis, Software bug management

中图分类号: 

  • TP311
[1]CHEN S,XIE X,YIN B,et al.Stay professional and efficient:Automatically generate titles for your bug reports[C]//International Conference on Automated Software Engineering(ASE).2020:385-397.
[2]KO A J,MYERS B A,CHAU D H.A linguistic analysis of how people describe software problems[C]//Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing(VL/HCC'06).2006:127-134.
[3]SUREKA A,INDUKURI K V.Linguistic analysis of bug report titles with respect to the dimension of bug importance[C]//The Third Annual ACM Bangalore Conference.2010:1-6.
[4]CRUZES D S,DYBA T.Recommended steps for thematic synthesis in software engineering[C]//International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement.2011:275-284.
[5]VICTOR C R,GIANLUIGI B,ROMBACH H D.The goal question metric approach[M]//Encyclopedia of Software Enginee-ring.1994:528-532.
[6]XU Y.A replication package for Examining the Quality of Bug Report Titles:An Empirical Study[EB/OL].https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7883398.
[7]TAN X,ZHOU M.How to communicate when submitting patches:An empirical study of the Linux kernel[J].Human-Computer Interaction,2019,3(CSCW):1-26.
[8]TIAN Y,ZHANG Y,STOL K J,et al.What makes a good commit message?[C]//International Conference on Software Engineering.2022:2389-2401.
[9]MASON M.Sample size and saturation in PhD studies usingqualitative interviews[C]//Forum:Qualitative Social Research.2010.
[10]TJONG KIM SANG E F,DE MEULDER F.Introduction to the CoNLL-2003 Shared Task:Language-Independent Named Entity Recognition[C]//the Seventh Conference on Natural Language Learning at HLT-NAACL 2003.2003:142-147.
[11]COHEN J.A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales[J].Educational and Psychological Measurement,1960,20(1):37-46.
[12]SOLTANI M,HERMANS F,BÄCK T.The significance of bug report elements[J].Empirical Software Engineering,2020,25(6):5255-5294.
[13]YUSOP N S M,GRUNDY J,VASA R.Reporting usability defects:do reporters report what software developers need?[C]//International Conference on Evaluation And Assessment in Software Engineering.2016:1-10.
[14]GAROUSI V,ERGEZER E G,HERKILOČLU K.Usage,use-fulness and quality of defect reports:An industrial case study[C]//International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering.Limerick:ACM,2016:1-6.
[15]JOHNSON J,MAHMUD J,WENDLAND T,et al.An empirical investigation into the reproduction of bug reports for android apps[C]//International Conference on Software Analysis,Evolution and Reengineering.IEEE Computer Society,2022.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!