skip to main content
10.1145/3194124.3194131acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesicseConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

National boundaries and semantics of artefacts in open source development

Published:28 May 2018Publication History

ABSTRACT

Global software development has long being recognised as a paradigm shift in modern software development. As an immediate effect, co-location of workers in the same building or office is not seen as necessary any longer. Coordination in distributed socio-technical systems is mostly achieved by means of the artifacts that are produced by the developers part of a project's team.

Geographic distance profoundly affects the ability to collaborate. With communication becoming less frequent, the challenge is for it to become more effective. This is especially complex when different nationalities, languages and cultures are part of the same development effort. Open source software is an example of a distributed, multi-lingual development effort. As such, the main resulting artefacts are discussions, and source code. Diverse backgrounds can produce a different semantic corpus if the authors come from the same ethnic and language groups or from different ones.

The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the artifacts in the context of their semantics, and how semantic corpora are affected by development and languages. By using a selection of Open Source projects developed within national boundaries, we compare their semantic richness, and how their class content is reflected in their identifiers. We also compare these national projects to a successful, international project. The aim is to discover how national boundaries influence the semantics of the developed code.

References

  1. Nemitari Ajienka and Andrea Capiluppi. 2016. Semantic Coupling Between Classes: Corpora or Identifiers?. In Proceedings of the 10th ACM/IEEE International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement. ACM, 40. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Gabriele Bavota, Andrea De Lucia, Andrian Marcus, and Rocco Oliveto. 2010. A two-step technique for extract class refactoring. In Proceedings of the IEEE/ACM international conference on Automated software engineering. ACM, 151--154. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Gabriele Bavota, Bogdan Dit, Rocco Oliveto, Massimiliano Di Penta, Denys Poshyvanyk, and Andrea De Lucia. 2013. An empirical study on the developers' perception of software coupling. In Proceedings of the 2013 International Conference on Software Engineering. IEEE Press, 692--701. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Gabriele Bavota, Malcom Gethers, Rocco Oliveto, Denys Poshyvanyk, and Andrea de Lucia. 2014. Improving software modularization via automated analysis of latent topics and dependencies. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology (TOSEM) 23, 1 (2014), 4. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Gabriele Bavota, Rocco Oliveto, Malcom Gethers, Denys Poshyvanyk, and Andrea De Lucia. 2014. Methodbook: Recommending move method refactorings via relational topic models. Software Engineering, IEEE Transactions on 40, 7 (2014), 671--694. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Eoin ó Conchúir, Pär Ågerfalk, Helena H Olsson, and Brian Fitzgerald. 2009. Global software development: where are the benefits? Commun. ACM 52, 8 (2009), 127--131. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Dimoklis Despotakis, Dhavalkumar Thakker, Lydia Lau, and Vania Dimitrova. 2011. Capturing the semantics of individual viewpoints on social signals in interpersonal communication. Semantic Web Journal, Special Issue on Personal and Social Semantic Web ((Under review)) (2011).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Robert Feldt and Ana Magazinius. 2010. Validity Threats in Empirical Software Engineering Research-An Initial Survey.. In SEKE. 374--379.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Malcom Gethers, Amir Aryani, and Denys Poshyvanyk. 2012. Combining conceptual and domain-based couplings to detect database and code dependencies. In Source Code Analysis and Manipulation (SCAM), 2012 IEEE 12th International Working Conference on. IEEE, 144--153. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Jesus M Gonzalez-Barahona, Gregorio Robles, and Daniel Izquierdo-Cortazar. 2016. Determining the Geographical distribution of a Community by means of a Time-zone Analysis. In Proceedings of the 12th International Symposium on Open Collaboration. ACM, 3. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Huzefa Kagdi, Malcom Gethers, and Denys Poshyvanyk. 2013. Integrating conceptual and logical couplings for change impact analysis in software. Empirical Software Engineering 18, 5 (2013), 933--969.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Huzefa Kagdi, Malcom Gethers, Denys Poshyvanyk, and Michael L Collard. 2010. Blending conceptual and evolutionary couplings to support change impact analysis in source code. In Reverse Engineering (WCRE), 2010 17th Working Conference on. IEEE, 119--128. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Vlado Kešelj, Fuchun Peng, Nick Cercone, and Calvin Thomas. 2003. N-gram-based author profiles for authorship attribution. In Proceedings of the conference pacific association for computational linguistics, PACLING, Vol. 3. 255--264.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Do Ba Khang and Tun Lin Moe. 2008. Success criteria and factors for international development projects: A life-cycle-based framework. Project Management Journal 39, 1 (2008), 72--84.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Kari Laitinen. 1996. Estimating understandability of software documents. ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes 21, 4 (1996), 81--92. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Paul Mcnamee and James Mayfield. 2004. Character n-gram tokenization for European language text retrieval. Information retrieval 7, 1--2 (2004), 73--97. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. John Noll, Sarah Beecham, and Ita Richardson. 2010. Global software development and collaboration: barriers and solutions. ACM inroads 1, 3 (2010), 66--78. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. David Lorge Parnas. 2011. Precise documentation: The key to better software. In The Future of Software Engineering. Springer, 125--148.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Denys Poshyvanyk and Andrian Marcus. 2006. The conceptual coupling metrics for object-oriented systems. In Software Maintenance, 2006. ICSM'06. 22nd IEEE International Conference on. IEEE, 469--478. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Denys Poshyvanyk, Andrian Marcus, Rudolf Ferenc, and Tibor Gyimóthy. 2009. Using information retrieval based coupling measures for impact analysis. Empirical software engineering 14, 1 (2009), 5--32. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Abdallah Qusef, Gabriele Bavota, Rocco Oliveto, Andrea De Lucia, and David Binkley. 2011. Scotch: Test-to-code traceability using slicing and conceptual coupling. In Software Maintenance (ICSM), 2011 27th IEEE International Conference on. IEEE, 63--72. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Jim Whitehead. 2007. Collaboration in software engineering: A roadmap. In 2007 Future of Software Engineering. IEEE Computer Society, 214--225. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Recommendations

Comments

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Sign in
  • Published in

    cover image ACM Conferences
    SoHeal '18: Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Software Health
    May 2018
    69 pages
    ISBN:9781450357302
    DOI:10.1145/3194124

    Copyright © 2018 ACM

    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    • Published: 28 May 2018

    Permissions

    Request permissions about this article.

    Request Permissions

    Check for updates

    Qualifiers

    • research-article

    Upcoming Conference

    ICSE 2025

PDF Format

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader