arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
arXiv 2103.04251cs.SE
收藏

揭示持续集成实践的好处和挑战

Uncovering the Benefits and Challenges of Continuous Integration Practices

Omar Elazhary, Colin Werner, Ze Shi Li, Derek Lowlind, Neil Ernst, Margaret-Anne Storey

摘要:

2006年,Fowler和Foemmel定义了十个核心的持续集成(CI)实践,这些实践可以提高软件开发反馈周期的速度并提高软件质量。从那时起,这些实践已被业界广泛采用,随后的研究表明,它们提高了软件质量。然而,人们对组织如何实现这些实践、开发人员认为它们带来的好处以及开发人员和组织在实现它们时遇到的挑战的理解很差。在本文中,我们讨论了一个多案例研究的三个小型到中型公司使用的建议套件的十个CI的做法。通过访谈和活动日志挖掘,我们了解到这些实践被广泛实施,但实施方式取决于其感知的好处,项目的背景以及组织使用的CI工具。我们还发现,CI实践可能会对软件过程产生新的约束,从而影响反馈周期。对于研究人员,我们表明,CI是如何实现的变化,因此研究CI(例如,使用数据采掘)需要了解这些差异作为研究的重要背景。对于从业者来说,我们的研究结果揭示了对使用这十种实践可能带来的好处和挑战的深入见解,以及项目背景如何重要。

英文摘要:

In 2006, Fowler and Foemmel defined ten core Continuous Integration (CI) practices that could increase the speed of software development feedback cycles and improve software quality. Since then, these practices have been widely adopted by industry and subsequent research has shown they improve software quality. However, there is poor understanding of how organizations implement these practices, of the benefits developers perceive they bring, and of the challenges developers and organizations experience in implementing them. In this paper, we discuss a multiple-case study of three small- to medium-sized companies using the recommended suite of ten CI practices. Using interviews and activity log mining, we learned that these practices are broadly implemented but how they are implemented varies depending on their perceived benefits, the context of the project, and the CI tools used by the organization. We also discovered that CI practices can create new constraints on the software process that hurt feedback cycle time. For researchers, we show that how CI is implemented varies, and thus studying CI (for example, using data mining) requires understanding these differences as important context for research studies. For practitioners, our findings reveal in-depth insights on the possible benefits and challenges from using the ten practices, and how project context matters.

机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来,可能存在错误,请以论文正文为准。

↑