The Secret Life of Patches: A Firefox Case Study

The goal of the code review process is to assess the quality of source code modifications (submitted as patches) before they are committed to a project's version control repository. This process is particularly important in open source projects to ensure the quality of contributions submitted b...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Baysal, O., Kononenko, O., Holmes, R., Godfrey, M. W.
Format: Conference Proceeding
Language:English
Subjects:
code review
Communities
Computer bugs
Educational institutions
Linux
Open source software
patch lifecycle
Process control
Switches
Online Access:Request full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by
cites
container_end_page 455
container_issue
container_start_page 447
container_title
container_volume
creator Baysal, O.
Kononenko, O.
Holmes, R.
Godfrey, M. W.
description The goal of the code review process is to assess the quality of source code modifications (submitted as patches) before they are committed to a project's version control repository. This process is particularly important in open source projects to ensure the quality of contributions submitted by the community, however, the review process can promote or discourage these contributions. In this paper, we study the patch lifecycle of the Mozilla Fire fox project. The model of a patch lifecycle was extracted from both the qualitative evidence of the individual processes (interviews and discussions with developers), and the quantitative assessment of the Mozilla process and practice. We contrast the lifecycle of a patch in pre- and post-rapid release development. A quantitative comparison showed that while the patch lifecycle remains mostly unchanged after switching to rapid release, the patches submitted by casual contributors are disproportionately more likely to be abandoned compared to core contributors. This suggests that patches from casual developers should receive extra care to both ensure quality and encourage future community contributions.
doi_str_mv 10.1109/WCRE.2012.54
format conference_proceeding
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>ieee_6IE</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_ieee_primary_6385140</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><ieee_id>6385140</ieee_id><sourcerecordid>6385140</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-i1944-61edc551c094e8fdde8bf2dfcecfc4c7d640819bba82b22f28eef0929e2234993</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNotjEtLw0AURscXmNbu3LmZP5B477wy110JrQoBRSsuSzJzh0aUShLB_vsGdPVx4JxPiGuEAhHo9r16WRUKUBXWnIgZlI6s8YR4KjKlS5tb7ehMLKj0aFypzcR4LrKptTlqC5diNgwfAAo0QSZgs2P5yqHnUdZdYrlP8rkZw46HO7mU667ntP-VVTNM2vgTD1fiIjWfAy_-dy7e1qtN9ZDXT_eP1bLOOyRjcoccg7UYgAz7FCP7NqmYAocUTCijM-CR2rbxqlUqKc-cgBSxUtoQ6bm4-fvtmHn73XdfTX_YOu0tGtBH8otFlw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Publisher</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>conference_proceeding</recordtype></control><display><type>conference_proceeding</type><title>The Secret Life of Patches: A Firefox Case Study</title><source>IEEE Electronic Library (IEL) Conference Proceedings</source><creator>Baysal, O. ; Kononenko, O. ; Holmes, R. ; Godfrey, M. W.</creator><creatorcontrib>Baysal, O. ; Kononenko, O. ; Holmes, R. ; Godfrey, M. W.</creatorcontrib><description>The goal of the code review process is to assess the quality of source code modifications (submitted as patches) before they are committed to a project's version control repository. This process is particularly important in open source projects to ensure the quality of contributions submitted by the community, however, the review process can promote or discourage these contributions. In this paper, we study the patch lifecycle of the Mozilla Fire fox project. The model of a patch lifecycle was extracted from both the qualitative evidence of the individual processes (interviews and discussions with developers), and the quantitative assessment of the Mozilla process and practice. We contrast the lifecycle of a patch in pre- and post-rapid release development. A quantitative comparison showed that while the patch lifecycle remains mostly unchanged after switching to rapid release, the patches submitted by casual contributors are disproportionately more likely to be abandoned compared to core contributors. This suggests that patches from casual developers should receive extra care to both ensure quality and encourage future community contributions.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1095-1350</identifier><identifier>ISBN: 9781467345361</identifier><identifier>ISBN: 1467345369</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2375-5369</identifier><identifier>EISBN: 0769548911</identifier><identifier>EISBN: 9780769548913</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1109/WCRE.2012.54</identifier><identifier>CODEN: IEEPAD</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>IEEE</publisher><subject>code review ; Communities ; Computer bugs ; Educational institutions ; Linux ; Open source software ; patch lifecycle ; Process control ; Switches</subject><ispartof>2012 19th Working Conference on Reverse Engineering, 2012, p.447-455</ispartof><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/6385140$$EHTML$$P50$$Gieee$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>309,310,780,784,789,790,2058,27925,54555,54920,54932</link.rule.ids><linktorsrc>$$Uhttps://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/6385140$$EView_record_in_IEEE$$FView_record_in_$$GIEEE</linktorsrc></links><search><creatorcontrib>Baysal, O.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kononenko, O.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Holmes, R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Godfrey, M. W.</creatorcontrib><title>The Secret Life of Patches: A Firefox Case Study</title><title>2012 19th Working Conference on Reverse Engineering</title><addtitle>wcre</addtitle><description>The goal of the code review process is to assess the quality of source code modifications (submitted as patches) before they are committed to a project's version control repository. This process is particularly important in open source projects to ensure the quality of contributions submitted by the community, however, the review process can promote or discourage these contributions. In this paper, we study the patch lifecycle of the Mozilla Fire fox project. The model of a patch lifecycle was extracted from both the qualitative evidence of the individual processes (interviews and discussions with developers), and the quantitative assessment of the Mozilla process and practice. We contrast the lifecycle of a patch in pre- and post-rapid release development. A quantitative comparison showed that while the patch lifecycle remains mostly unchanged after switching to rapid release, the patches submitted by casual contributors are disproportionately more likely to be abandoned compared to core contributors. This suggests that patches from casual developers should receive extra care to both ensure quality and encourage future community contributions.</description><subject>code review</subject><subject>Communities</subject><subject>Computer bugs</subject><subject>Educational institutions</subject><subject>Linux</subject><subject>Open source software</subject><subject>patch lifecycle</subject><subject>Process control</subject><subject>Switches</subject><issn>1095-1350</issn><issn>2375-5369</issn><isbn>9781467345361</isbn><isbn>1467345369</isbn><isbn>0769548911</isbn><isbn>9780769548913</isbn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>conference_proceeding</rsrctype><creationdate>2012</creationdate><recordtype>conference_proceeding</recordtype><sourceid>6IE</sourceid><recordid>eNotjEtLw0AURscXmNbu3LmZP5B477wy110JrQoBRSsuSzJzh0aUShLB_vsGdPVx4JxPiGuEAhHo9r16WRUKUBXWnIgZlI6s8YR4KjKlS5tb7ehMLKj0aFypzcR4LrKptTlqC5diNgwfAAo0QSZgs2P5yqHnUdZdYrlP8rkZw46HO7mU667ntP-VVTNM2vgTD1fiIjWfAy_-dy7e1qtN9ZDXT_eP1bLOOyRjcoccg7UYgAz7FCP7NqmYAocUTCijM-CR2rbxqlUqKc-cgBSxUtoQ6bm4-fvtmHn73XdfTX_YOu0tGtBH8otFlw</recordid><startdate>201210</startdate><enddate>201210</enddate><creator>Baysal, O.</creator><creator>Kononenko, O.</creator><creator>Holmes, R.</creator><creator>Godfrey, M. W.</creator><general>IEEE</general><scope>6IE</scope><scope>6IL</scope><scope>CBEJK</scope><scope>RIE</scope><scope>RIL</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201210</creationdate><title>The Secret Life of Patches: A Firefox Case Study</title><author>Baysal, O. ; Kononenko, O. ; Holmes, R. ; Godfrey, M. W.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-i1944-61edc551c094e8fdde8bf2dfcecfc4c7d640819bba82b22f28eef0929e2234993</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>conference_proceedings</rsrctype><prefilter>conference_proceedings</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2012</creationdate><topic>code review</topic><topic>Communities</topic><topic>Computer bugs</topic><topic>Educational institutions</topic><topic>Linux</topic><topic>Open source software</topic><topic>patch lifecycle</topic><topic>Process control</topic><topic>Switches</topic><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Baysal, O.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kononenko, O.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Holmes, R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Godfrey, M. W.</creatorcontrib><collection>IEEE Electronic Library (IEL) Conference Proceedings</collection><collection>IEEE Proceedings Order Plan All Online (POP All Online) 1998-present by volume</collection><collection>IEEE Xplore All Conference Proceedings</collection><collection>IEEE Electronic Library Online</collection><collection>IEEE Proceedings Order Plans (POP All) 1998-Present</collection></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext_linktorsrc</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Baysal, O.</au><au>Kononenko, O.</au><au>Holmes, R.</au><au>Godfrey, M. W.</au><format>book</format><genre>proceeding</genre><ristype>CONF</ristype><atitle>The Secret Life of Patches: A Firefox Case Study</atitle><btitle>2012 19th Working Conference on Reverse Engineering</btitle><stitle>wcre</stitle><date>2012-10</date><risdate>2012</risdate><spage>447</spage><epage>455</epage><pages>447-455</pages><issn>1095-1350</issn><eissn>2375-5369</eissn><isbn>9781467345361</isbn><isbn>1467345369</isbn><eisbn>0769548911</eisbn><eisbn>9780769548913</eisbn><coden>IEEPAD</coden><abstract>The goal of the code review process is to assess the quality of source code modifications (submitted as patches) before they are committed to a project's version control repository. This process is particularly important in open source projects to ensure the quality of contributions submitted by the community, however, the review process can promote or discourage these contributions. In this paper, we study the patch lifecycle of the Mozilla Fire fox project. The model of a patch lifecycle was extracted from both the qualitative evidence of the individual processes (interviews and discussions with developers), and the quantitative assessment of the Mozilla process and practice. We contrast the lifecycle of a patch in pre- and post-rapid release development. A quantitative comparison showed that while the patch lifecycle remains mostly unchanged after switching to rapid release, the patches submitted by casual contributors are disproportionately more likely to be abandoned compared to core contributors. This suggests that patches from casual developers should receive extra care to both ensure quality and encourage future community contributions.</abstract><pub>IEEE</pub><doi>10.1109/WCRE.2012.54</doi><tpages>9</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext_linktorsrc
identifier ISSN: 1095-1350
ispartof 2012 19th Working Conference on Reverse Engineering, 2012, p.447-455
issn 1095-1350
2375-5369
language eng
recordid cdi_ieee_primary_6385140
source IEEE Electronic Library (IEL) Conference Proceedings
subjects code review
Communities
Computer bugs
Educational institutions
Linux
Open source software
patch lifecycle
Process control
Switches
title The Secret Life of Patches: A Firefox Case Study
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-19T21%3A37%3A14IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-ieee_6IE&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=proceeding&rft.atitle=The%20Secret%20Life%20of%20Patches:%20A%20Firefox%20Case%20Study&rft.btitle=2012%2019th%20Working%20Conference%20on%20Reverse%20Engineering&rft.au=Baysal,%20O.&rft.date=2012-10&rft.spage=447&rft.epage=455&rft.pages=447-455&rft.issn=1095-1350&rft.eissn=2375-5369&rft.isbn=9781467345361&rft.isbn_list=1467345369&rft.coden=IEEPAD&rft_id=info:doi/10.1109/WCRE.2012.54&rft.eisbn=0769548911&rft.eisbn_list=9780769548913&rft_dat=%3Cieee_6IE%3E6385140%3C/ieee_6IE%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-i1944-61edc551c094e8fdde8bf2dfcecfc4c7d640819bba82b22f28eef0929e2234993%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_ieee_id=6385140&rfr_iscdi=true