Code smells are poor implementation choices applied by developers during software evolution that often lead to critical flaws or failure. Much in the same way, community smells reflect the presence of organizational and socio-Technical issues within a software community that may lead to additional project costs. Recent empirical studies provide evidence that community smells are often-if not always-connected to circumstances such as code smells. In this paper we look deeper into this connection by conducting a mixed-methods empirical study of 117 releases from 9 open-source systems. The qualitative and quantitative sides of our mixed-methods study were run in parallel and assume a mutually-confirmative connotation. On the one hand, we survey 162 developers of the 9 considered systems to investigate whether developers perceive relationship between community smells and the code smells found in those projects. On the other hand, we perform a fine-grained analysis into the 117 releases of our dataset to measure the extent to which community smells impact code smell intensity (i.e., criticality). We then propose a code smell intensity prediction model that relies on both technical and community-related aspects. The results of both sides of our mixed-methods study lead to one conclusion: community-related factors contribute to the intensity of code smells. This conclusion supports the joint use of community and code smells detection as a mechanism for the joint management of technical and social problems around software development communities.

@en

Automatic static analysis tools (ASATs) are instruments that support code quality assessment by automatically detecting defects and design issues. Despite their popularity, they are characterized by (i) a high false positive rate and (ii) the low comprehensibility of the generated warnings. However, no prior studies have investigated the usage of ASATs in different development contexts (e.g., code reviews, regular development), nor how open source projects integrate ASATs into their workflows. These perspectives are paramount to improve the prioritization of the identified warnings. To shed light on the actual ASATs usage practices, in this paper we first survey 56 developers (66% from industry and 34% from open source projects) and interview 11 industrial experts leveraging ASATs in their workflow with the aim of understanding how they use ASATs in different contexts. Furthermore, to investigate how ASATs are being used in the workflows of open source projects, we manually inspect the contribution guidelines of 176 open-source systems and extract the ASATs’ configuration and build files from their corresponding GitHub repositories. Our study highlights that (i) 71% of developers do pay attention to different warning categories depending on the development context; (ii) 63% of our respondents rely on specific factors (e.g., team policies and composition) when prioritizing warnings to fix during their programming; and (iii) 66% of the projects define how to use specific ASATs, but only 37% enforce their usage for new contributions. The perceived relevance of ASATs varies between different projects and domains, which is a sign that ASATs use is still not a common practice. In conclusion, this study confirms previous findings on the unwillingness of developers to configure ASATs and it emphasizes the necessity to improve existing strategies for the selection and prioritization of ASATs warnings that are shown to developers. @en