Searcharxiv⌕ Search

arXiv subjects

Daniel Feitosa

Publications and source records attributed to Daniel Feitosa.

20 records · Page 2Linked to original sources
arXiv2021

Does it matter who pays back Technical Debt? An empirical study of self-fixed TD

Context: Technical Debt (TD) can be paid back either by those that incurred it or by others. We call the former self-fixed TD, and it can be particularly effective, as developers are experts in their own code and are well-suited to fix the corresponding TD issues. Objective: The goal of our study is to investigate self-fixed technical debt, especially the extent in which TD is self-fixed, which types of TD are more likely to be self-fixed, whether the remediation time of self-fixed TD is shorter than non-self-fixed TD and how development behaviors are related to self-fixed TD. Method: We report on an empirical study that analyzes the self-fixed issues of five types of TD (i.e., Code, Defect, Design, Documentation and Test), captured via static analysis, in more than 44,000 commits obtained from 20 Python and 16 Java projects of the Apache Software Foundation. Results: The results show that about half of the fixed issues are self-fixed and that the likelihood of contained TD issues being self-fixed is negatively correlated with project size, the number of developers and total issues. Moreover, there is no significant difference of the survival time between self-fixed and non-self-fixed issues. Furthermore, developers are more keen to pay back their own TD when it is related to lower code level issues, e.g., Defect Debt and Code Debt. Finally, developers who are more dedicated to or knowledgeable about the project contribute to a higher chance of self-fixing TD. Conclusions: These results can benefit both researchers and practitioners by aiding the prioritization of TD remediation activities and refining strategies within development teams, and by informing the development of TD management tools.

cs.SE↗
arXiv2021

Do practitioners intentionally self-fix Technical Debt and why?

The impact of Technical Debt (TD) on software maintenance and evolution is of great concern, but recent evidence shows that a considerable amount of TD is fixed by the same developers who introduced it; this is termed self-fixed TD. This characteristic of TD management can potentially impact team dynamics and practices in managing TD. However, the initial evidence is based on low-level source code analysis; this casts some doubt whether practitioners repay their own debt intentionally and under what circumstances. To address this gap, we conducted an online survey on 17 well-known Java and Python open-source software communities to investigate practitioners' intent and rationale for self-fixing technical debt. We also investigate the relationship between human-related factors (e.g., experience) and self-fixing. The results, derived from the responses of 181 participants, show that a majority addresses their own debt consciously and often. Moreover, those with a higher level of involvement (e.g., more experience in the project and number of contributions) tend to be more concerned about self-fixing TD. We also learned that the sense of responsibility is a common self-fixing driver and that decisions to fix TD are not superficial but consider balancing costs and benefits, among other factors. The findings in this paper can lead to improving TD prevention and management strategies.

cs.SE↗