Abstract
AbstractTechnical debt refers to taking shortcuts to achieve short-term goals while sacrificing the long-term maintainability and evolvability of software systems. A large part of technical debt is explicitly reported by the developers themselves; this is commonly referred to as Self-Admitted Technical Debt or SATD. Previous work has focused on identifying SATD from source code comments and issue trackers. However, there are no approaches available for automatically identifying SATD from other sources such as commit messages and pull requests, or by combining multiple sources. Therefore, we propose and evaluate an approach for automated SATD identification that integrates four sources: source code comments, commit messages, pull requests, and issue tracking systems. Our findings show that our approach outperforms baseline approaches and achieves an average F1-score of 0.611 when detecting four types of SATD (i.e., code/design debt, requirement debt, documentation debt, and test debt) from the four aforementioned sources. Thereafter, we analyze 23.6M code comments, 1.3M commit messages, 3.7M issue sections, and 1.7M pull request sections to characterize SATD in 103 open-source projects. Furthermore, we investigate the SATD keywords and relations between SATD in different sources. The findings indicate, among others, that: 1) SATD is evenly spread among all sources; 2) issues and pull requests are the two most similar sources regarding the number of shared SATD keywords, followed by commit messages, and then followed by code comments; 3) there are four kinds of relations between SATD items in the different sources.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference42 articles.
1. Aaron Stannard (2021) How to use Github professionally: Best practices for working with Github in team settings. https://petabridge.com/blog/use-github-professionally/ . Accessed 1 March 2022
2. Akira Ajisaka (2021) Hadoop contributor guide - how to contribute. https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/HADOOP/How+To+Contribute. Accessed 1 March 2022
3. Allman E (2012) Managing technical debt. Commun ACM 55 (5):50–55
4. Alves NS, Ribeiro LF, Caires V, Mendes TS, Spínola RO (2014) Towards an ontology of terms on technical debt. In: 2014 6th international workshop on managing technical debt. IEEE, pp 1–7
5. Apache Software Foundation (2021) Briefing: The apache way. http://www.apache.org/theapacheway/index.html. Accessed 1 March 2022
Cited by
11 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
1. Technical Debt Tools: a Survey and an Empirical Evaluation;Journal of Software Engineering Research and Development;2024-08-19
2. Dopamin: Transformer-based Comment Classifiers through Domain Post-Training and Multi-level Layer Aggregation;Proceedings of the Third ACM/IEEE International Workshop on NL-based Software Engineering;2024-04-20
3. What Can Self-Admitted Technical Debt Tell Us About Security? A Mixed-Methods Study;Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Mining Software Repositories;2024-04-15
4. SATDAUG - A Balanced and Augmented Dataset for Detecting Self-Admitted Technical Debt;Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Mining Software Repositories;2024-04-15
5. Self-Admitted Technical Debts Identification: How Far Are We?;2024 IEEE International Conference on Software Analysis, Evolution and Reengineering (SANER);2024-03-12