arXiv subjects

Gustavo Pinto

Publications and source records attributed to Gustavo Pinto.

44 records · Page 3Linked to original sources

arXiv2020

Work Practices and Perceptions from Women Core Developers in OSS Communities

The effect of gender diversity in open source communities has gained increasing attention from practitioners and researchers. For instance, organizations such as the Python Software Foundation and the OpenStack Foundation started actions to increase gender diversity and promote women to top positions in the communities. Although the general underrepresentation of women (a.k.a. horizontal segregation) in open source communities has been explored in a number of research studies, little is known about the vertical segregation in open source communities -- which occurs when there are fewer women in high-level positions. To address this research gap, in this paper we present the results of a mixed-methods study on gender diversity and work practices of core developers contributing to open-source communities. In the first study, we used mining-software repositories procedures to identify the core developers of 711 open source projects, in order to understand how common are women core developers in open source communities and characterize their work practices. In the second study, we surveyed the women core developers we identified in the first study to collect their perceptions of gender diversity and gender bias they might have observed while contributing to open source systems. Our findings show that open source communities present both horizontal and vertical segregation (only 2.3% of the core developers are women). Nevertheless, differently from previous studies, most of the women core developers (65.7%) report never having experienced gender discrimination when contributing to an open source project. Finally, we did not note substantial differences between the work practices among women and men core developers. We reflect on these findings and present some ideas that might increase the participation of women in open source communities.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2020

Characterizing the Roles of Contributors in Open-source Scientific Software Projects

The development of scientific software is, more than ever, critical to the practice of science, and this is accompanied by a trend towards more open and collaborative efforts. Unfortunately, there has been little investigation into who is driving the evolution of such scientific software or how the collaboration happens. In this paper, we address this problem. We present an extensive analysis of seven open-source scientific software projects in order to develop an empirically-informed model of the development process. This analysis was complemented by a survey of 72 scientific software developers. In the majority of the projects, we found senior research staff (e.g. professors) to be responsible for half or more of commits (an average commit share of 72%) and heavily involved in architectural concerns (seniors were more likely to interact with files related to the build system, project meta-data, and developer documentation). Juniors (e.g.graduate students) also contribute substantially -- in one studied project, juniors made almost 100% of its commits. Still, graduate students had the longest contribution periods among juniors (with 1.72 years of commit activity compared to 0.98 years for postdocs and 4 months for undergraduates). Moreover, we also found that third-party contributors are scarce, contributing for just one day for the project. The results from this study aim to help scientists to better understand their own projects, communities, and the contributors' behavior, while paving the road for future software engineering research

cs.SE↗

arXiv2020

Rapid Reviews in Software Engineering

Integrating research evidence into practice is one of the main goals of Evidence-Based Software Engineering (EBSE). Secondary studies, one of the main EBSE products, are intended to summarize the best research evidence and make them easily consumable by practitioners. However, recent studies show that some secondary studies lack connections with software engineering practice. In this chapter, we present the concept of Rapid Reviews, which are lightweight secondary studies focused on delivering evidence to practitioners in a timely manner. Rapid reviews support practitioners in their decision-making, and should be conducted bounded to a practical problem, inserted into a practical context. Thus, Rapid Reviews can be easily integrated in a knowledge/technology transfer initiative. After describing the basic concepts, we present the results and experiences of conducting two Rapid Reviews. We also provide guidelines to help researchers and practitioners who want to conduct Rapid Reviews, and we finally discuss topics that my concern the research community about the feasibility of Rapid Reviews as an Evidence-Based method. In conclusion, we believe Rapid Reviews might interest researchers and practitioners working in the intersection between software engineering research and practice.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2020

Analyzing the evolution and diversity of SBES Program Committee

The Brazilian Symposium on Software Engineering (SBES) is one of the most important Latin American Software Engineering conferences. It was first held in 1987, and in 2019 marks its 33rd edition. Over these years, many researchers have participated in SBES, attending the conference, submitting, and reviewing papers. The researchers who participate in the Program Committee (PC) and perform the reviewers' role are fundamentally important to SBES, since their evaluations (e.g., deciding whether a paper is accepted or not) have the potential of drawing what SBES is now. Knowing that diversity is an important aspect of any group work, we wanted to understand diversity in the SBES PC community. We investigated a number of characteristics of SBES PC members, including their gender and geographic location. We also analyzed the turnover and renovation of the committee. Among the findings, we observed that although the number of participants in the SBES PC has increased over the years, most of them are men (~80%) and from the Southeast and Northeast of Brazil, with very few members from the North region. We also observed that there is a small turnover: during the 2010 decade, only 11% of new members were added to the PC. Finally, we investigated the participation of the PC members publishing papers at SBES. We observed that only 24% of the papers accepted to SBES were authored by members who were not committee members of the respective year. Moreover, committee members usually do not collaborate among themselves: a significant number of the papers are authored by the PC members and students. This paper may contribute to the SBES community, in particular, its special interest group, in understanding the needs and challenges of the PC's participants.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2019

Continuous Integration Theater

Background: Continuous Integration (CI) systems are now the bedrock of several software development practices. Several tools such as TravisCI, CircleCI, and Hudson, that implement CI practices, are commonly adopted by software engineers. However, the way that software engineers use these tools could lead to what we call "Continuous Integration Theater", a situation in which software engineers do not employ these tools effectively, leading to unhealthy CI practices. Aims: The goal of this paper is to make sense of how commonplace are these unhealthy continuous integration practices being employed in practice. Method: By inspecting 1,270 open-source projects that use TravisCI, the most used CI service, we quantitatively studied how common is to use CI (1) with infrequent commits, (2) in a software project with poor test coverage, (3) with builds that stay broken for long periods, and (4) with builds that take too long to run. Results: We observed that 748 ($sim$60%) projects face infrequent commits, which essentially makes the merging process harder. Moreover, we were able to find code coverage information for 51 projects. The average code coverage was 78%, although Ruby projects have a higher code coverage than Java projects (86% and 63%, respectively). However, some projects with very small coverage ($sim$4%) were found. Still, we observed that 85% of the studied projects have at least one broken build that take more than four days to be fixed. Interestingly, very small projects (up to 1,000 lines of code) are the ones that take the longest to fix broken builds. Finally, we noted that, for the majority of the studied projects, the build is executed under the 10 minutes rule of thumb. Conclusions: Our results are important to an increasing community of software engineers that employ CI practices on daily basis but may not be aware of bad practices that are eventually employed.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2019

Software Engineering Research Community Viewpoints on Rapid Reviews

Background: One of the most important current challenges of Software Engineering (SE) research is to provide relevant evidence to practice. In health related fields, Rapid Reviews (RRs) have shown to be an effective method to achieve that goal. However, little is known about how the SE research community perceives the potential applicability of RRs. Aims: The goal of this study is to understand the SE research community viewpoints towards the use of RRs as a means to provide evidence to practitioners. Method: To understand their viewpoints, we invited 37 researchers to analyze 50 opinion statements about RRs, and rate them according to what extent they agree with each statement. Q-Methodology was employed to identify the most salient viewpoints, represented by the so called factors. Results: Four factors were identified: Factor A groups undecided researchers that need more evidence before using RRs; Researchers grouped in Factor B are generally positive about RRs, but highlight the need to define minimum standards; Factor C researchers are more skeptical and reinforce the importance of high quality evidence; Researchers aligned to Factor D have a pragmatic point of view, considering RRs can be applied based on the context and constraints faced by practitioners. Conclusions: In conclusion, although there are opposing viewpoints, there are also some common grounds. For example, all viewpoints agree that both RRs and Systematic Reviews can be poorly or well conducted.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2018

Building a Collaborative Culture: A Grounded Theory of Well Succeeded DevOps Adoption in Practice

Background. DevOps is a set of practices and cultural values that aims to reduce the barriers between development and operations teams. Due to its increasing interest and imprecise definitions, existing research works have tried to characterize DevOps---mainly using a set of concepts and related practices. Aims. Nevertheless, little is known about thepractitioners practitioners' understanding about successful paths for DevOps adoption. The lack of such understanding might hinder institutions to adopt DevOps practices. Therefore, our goal here is to present a theory about DevOps adoption, highlighting the main related concepts that contribute to its adoption in industry. Method. Our work builds upon Classic Grounded Theory. We interviewed practitioners that contributed to DevOps adoption in 15 companies from different domains and across 5 countries. We empirically evaluate our model through a case study, whose goal is to increase the maturity level of DevOps adoption at the Brazilian Federal Court of Accounts, a Brazilian Government institution.Results. This paper presents a model to improve both the understanding and guidance of DevOps adoption. The model increments the existing view of DevOps by explaining the role and motivation of each category (and their relationships) in the DevOps adoption process. We organize this model in terms of DevOps enabler categories and DevOps outcome categories. We provide evidence that collaboration is the core DevOps concern, contrasting with an existing wisdom that implanting specific tools to automate building, deployment, and infrastructure provisioning and management is enough to achieve DevOps. Conclusions. Altogether, our results contribute to (a) generating an adequate understanding of DevOps, from the perspective of practitioners; and (b) assisting other institutions in the migration path towards DevOps adoption.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2018

Open Source Development Around the World: A Comparative Study

Open source software has an increasing importance in our modern society, providing basic services to other software systems and also supporting the rapid development of a variety of end-user applications. Recently, world-wide code sharing platforms, like GitHub, are also contributing to open source's growth. However, little is known on how this growth is distributed around the world and about the characteristics of the projects developed in different countries. In this article, we provide a characterization of 2,648 open source projects developed in 20 countries. We reveal the number of projects per country, the popularity and programming language of each country's project and also show how the number of projects in a country correlates to its GDP. Finally, we assess the maintainability and internal code quality of the studied projects, using a tool called BetterCodeHub.

cs.SE↗