Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Add an academic review paper for code reviewer recommendation studies #64

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Add an academic review paper for code reviewer recommendation studies #64

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
1 change: 1 addition & 0 deletions readme.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -18,6 +18,7 @@ Code review is the systematic examination (sometimes referred to as peer review)

- [An experiment to assess the cost-benefits of code inspections in large scale software development (Porter, Siy, Toman & Votta, 1997)](http://laser.cs.umass.edu/courses/cs521-621.Fall10/documents/PorterSiyetal.pdf) Early paper that tested a range of then-current review techniques including multi-stage review and code-review-via-meeting that found you can get most of the benefit in an offline, single pass, with two reviewers.
- [Anywhere, anytime code inspections: using the Web to remove inspection bottlenecks in large-scale software development (Perpich, Perry, Porter, Votta & Wade, 1997)](https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=253234) One day in the far future the best way to review code will be on the world wide web.
- [A review of code reviewer recommendation studies: Challenges and future directions (Cetin, Dogan & Tuzun, 2021)](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0167642321000459) A systematic literature review of code-reviewer recommendation.
- [Characteristics of Useful Code Reviews: An Empirical Study at Microsoft (Bosu, Greiler, Bird, 2015)](https://www.michaelagreiler.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Characteristics-Of-Useful-Comments.pdf) This paper reports the findings of a large scale qualitative and quantitative study focusing on understanding which code review comments are considered useful by developers.
- [Code Reviewing in the Trenches: Understanding Challenges, Best Practices, and Tool Needs (MacLeod, Greiler, Storey, Bird, Czerwonka, 2018)](https://www.michaelagreiler.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Code-Reviewing-in-the-Trenches-Understanding-Challenges-Best-Practices-and-Tool-Needs.pdf) A large scale study of over 900 Microsoft developers to understand their code review processes, their motivations to do code reviews, and which pitfalls and best practices they encounter.
- [Design and Code Inspections to Reduce Errors in Program Development (Fagan, 2002)](https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-642-59412-0_35) Using a more formal process, particularly with defined roles for each participant and drive a big increase in error detection during review.
Expand Down