Developer contribution guidelines are used in social coding sites like GitHub to explain and shape the process a project expects contributors to follow. They set standards for all participants and 'save time and hassle caused by improperly created pull requests or issues that have to be rejected and re-submitted' (GitHub). Yet, we lack a systematic understanding of the content of a typical contribution guideline, as well as the extent to which these guidelines are followed in practice. Additionally, understanding how guidelines may impact projects that use Continuous Integration as part of the contribution process is of particular interest. To address this knowledge gap, we conducted a mixed-methods study of 53 GitHub projects with explicit contribution guidelines and coded the guidelines to extract key themes. We then created a process model using GitHub activity data (e.g., commit, new issue, new pull request) to compare the actual activity with the prescribed contribution guidelines. We show that approximately 68% of these projects diverge significantly from the expected process.

@en

Automated testing is considered an essential process for ensuring software quality. However, writing and maintaining high-quality test code is challenging and frequently considered of secondary importance. For production code, many open source and industrial software projects employ code review, a well-established software quality practice, but the question remains whether and how code review is also used for ensuring the quality of test code. The aim of this research is to answer this question and to increase our understanding of what developers think and do when it comes to reviewing test code. We conducted both quantitative and qualitative methods to analyze more than 300,000 code reviews, and interviewed 12 developers about how they review test files. This work resulted in an overview of current code reviewing practices, a set of identified obstacles limiting the review of test code, and a set of issues that developers would like to see improved in code review tools. The study reveals that reviewing test files is very different from reviewing production files, and that the navigation within the review itself is one of the main issues developers currently face. Based on our findings, we propose a series of recommendations and suggestions for the design of tools and future research.@en

Many developers rely on modern news aggregator sites such as reddit and hn to stay up to date with the latest technological developments and trends. In order to understand what motivates developers to contribute, what kind of content is shared, and how knowledge is shaped by the community, we interviewed and surveyed developers that participate on the reddit programming subreddit and we analyzed a sample of posts on both reddit and hn. We learned what kind of content is shared in these websites and developer motivations for posting, sharing, discussing, evaluating, and aggregating knowledge on these aggregators, while revealing challenges developers face in terms of how content and participant behavior is moderated. Our insights aim to improve the practices developers follow when using news aggregators, as well as guide tool makers on how to improve their tools. Our findings are also relevant to researchers that study developer communities of practice.@en

The pull-based development model is an emerging way of contributing to distributed software projects that is gaining enormous popularity within the open source software (OSS) world. Previous work has examined this model by focusing on projects and their owners-we complement it by examining the work practices of project contributors and the challenges they face. We conducted a survey with 645 top contributors to active OSS projects using the pull-based model on GitHub, the prevalent social coding site. We also analyzed traces extracted from corresponding GitHub repositories. Our research shows that: contributors have a strong interest in maintaining awareness of project status to get inspiration and avoid duplicating work, but they do not actively propagate information; communication within pull requests is reportedly limited to low-level concerns and contributors often use communication channels external to pull requests; challenges are mostly social in nature, with most reporting poor responsiveness from integrators; and the increased transparency of this setting is a confirmed motivation to contribute. Based on these findings, we present recommendations for practitioners to streamline the contribution process and discuss potential future research directions.

@en

In the pull-based development model, the integrator has the crucial role of managing and integrating contributions. This work focuses on the role of the integrator and investigates working habits and challenges alike. We set up an exploratory qualitative study involving a large-scale survey of 749 integrators, to which we add quantitative data from the integrator's project. Our results provide insights into the factors they consider in their decision making process to accept or reject a contribution. Our key findings are that integrators struggle to maintain the quality of their projects and have difficulties with prioritizing contributions that are to be merged. Our insights have implications for practitioners who wish to use or improve their pullbased development process, as well as for researchers striving to understand the theoretical implications of the pull-based model in software development.

@en