[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/ skip to main content
10.1145/1985441.1985458acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesicseConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Empirical evaluation of reliability improvement in an evolving software product line

Published: 21 May 2011 Publication History

Abstract

Reliability is important to software product-line developers since many product lines require reliable operation. It is typically assumed that as a software product line matures, its reliability improves. Since post-deployment failures impact reliability, we study this claim on an open-source software product line, Eclipse. We investigate the failure trend of common components (reused across all products), highreuse variation components (reused in five or six products) and low-reuse variation components (reused in one or two products) as Eclipse evolves. We also study how much the common and variation components change over time both in terms of addition of new files and modification of existing files. Quantitative results from mining and analysis of the Eclipse bug and release repositories show that as the product line evolves, fewer serious failures occur in components implementing commonality, and that these components also exhibit less change over time. These results were roughly as expected. However, contrary to expectation, components implementing variations, even when reused in five or more products, continue to evolve fairly rapidly. Perhaps as a result, the number of severe failures in variation components shows no uniform pattern of decrease over time. The paper describes and discusses this and related results.

References

[1]
Cvschangelogbuilder, tool for generating cvs log reports. http://cvschangelogb.sourceforge.net/.
[2]
Eclipse bugzilla wiki homepage. https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/.
[3]
Eclipse bugzilla wiki homepage. http://wiki.eclipse.org/Eclipse/Bug_Tracking.
[4]
Software engineering institute, software product lines. http://www.sei.cmu.edu/productlines/.
[5]
Software product line hall of fame. http://www.splc.net/fame.html.
[6]
A. Avizienis, J. claude Laprie, and B. Randell. Fundamental concepts of dependability, 2001.
[7]
J. A. Børretzen and R. Conradi. Results and experiences from an empirical study of fault reports in industrial projects. In PROFES 2006. LNCS, pages 389--394. Springer, 2006.
[8]
C. Catal and B. Diri. A systematic review of software fault prediction studies. Expert Systems with Applications, 36(4):7346--7354, 2009.
[9]
G. Chastek, J. McGregor, and L. Northrop. Observations from viewing eclipse as a product line. In Proceedings on the Third International Workshop on Open Source Software and Product Lines, pages 1--6, 2007.
[10]
N. E. Fenton and N. Ohlsson. Quantitative analysis of faults and failures in a complex software system. IEEE Trans. on Software Engineering, 26:797--814, 2000.
[11]
H. Gomaa. Designing Software Product Lines with UML: From Use Cases to Pattern-Based Software Architectures. Addison Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc., Redwood City, CA, USA, 2004.
[12]
P. J. Guo, T. Zimmermann, N. Nagappan, and B. Murphy. Characterizing and predicting which bugs get fixed: an empirical study of Microsoft Windows. In Proc. of the 32nd ACM/IEEE International Conference on Software Engineering - Volume 1, ICSE'10, pages 495--504, New York, NY, USA, 2010. ACM.
[13]
M. Hamill and K. Goševa-Popstojanova. Common trends in software fault and failure data. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng., 35:484--496, July 2009.
[14]
Y. Jiang, B. Cukic, and T. Menzies. Can data transformation help in the detection of fault-prone modules? In Proc. of the 2008 workshop on Defects in large software systems, DEFECTS '08, pages 16--20, New York, NY, USA, 2008. ACM.
[15]
R. R. Lutz and I. C. Mikulski. Empirical analysis of safety-critical anomalies during operations. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 30:172--180, 2004.
[16]
R. R. Lutz, D. M. Weiss, S. Krishnan, and J. Yang. Software product line engineering for long-lived, sustainable systems. In J. Bosch and J. Lee, editors, SPLC, volume 6287 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 430--434. Springer, 2010.
[17]
T. Menzies, Z. Milton, B. Turhan, B. Cukic, Y. Jiang, and A. Bener. Defect prediction from static code features: current results, limitations, new approaches. Automated Software Engg., 17:375--407, December 2010.
[18]
A. Mockus, R. T. Fielding, and J. Herbsleb. A case study of open source software development: the apache server. In Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE 2000), pages 263--272. ACM Press, 2000.
[19]
P. Mohagheghi and R. Conradi. An empirical investigation of software reuse benefits in a large telecom product. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology, 17:13:1--13:31, June 2008.
[20]
P. Mohagheghi, R. Conradi, O. M. Killi, and H. Schwarz. An empirical study of software reuse vs. defect-density and stability. In Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on Software Engineering, ICSE '04, pages 282--292, Washington, DC, USA, 2004. IEEE Computer Society.
[21]
N. Nagappan, T. Ball, and A. Zeller. Mining metrics to predict component failures. In Proceedings of the 28th international conference on Software engineering, ICSE '06, pages 452--461, New York, NY, USA, 2006.
[22]
N. Nagappan, A. Zeller, T. Zimmermann, K. Herzig, and B. Murphy. Change bursts as defect predictors. In ISSRE, pages 309--318, 2010.
[23]
J. W. Paulson, G. Succi, and A. Eberlein. An empirical study of open-source and closed-source software products. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 30:246--256, 2004.
[24]
K. Pohl, G. Böckle, and F. J. v. d. Linden. Software Product Line Engineering: Foundations, Principles and Techniques. Springer-Verlag New York, Inc., Secaucus, NJ, USA, 2005.
[25]
C. Rahmani, A. Azadmanesh, and L. Najjar. A comparative analysis of open source software reliability. Journal of Software, 5:1384--1394, December 2010.
[26]
D. M. Weiss and C. T. R. Lai. Software product-line engineering: a family-based software development process. Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc., Boston, MA, USA, 1999.
[27]
T. Zimmermann, N. Nagappan, and A. Zeller. Predicting Bugs from History, chapter Predicting Bugs from History, pages 69--88. Springer, February 2008.
[28]
T. Zimmermann, R. Premraj, and A. Zeller. Predicting defects for eclipse. In Proceedings of the Third International Workshop on Predictor Models in Software Engineering, May 2007.

Cited By

View all
  • (2018)Software structure evolution and relation to subgraph defectivenessIET Software10.1049/iet-sen.2018.5060Online publication date: 11-Dec-2018
  • (2017)Do Software Reliability Prediction Models Meet Industrial Perceptions?Proceedings of the 10th Innovations in Software Engineering Conference10.1145/3021460.3021467(66-73)Online publication date: 5-Feb-2017
  • (2016)Evaluating Bug-Fixing in Software Product LinesProceedings of the 10th ACM/IEEE International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement10.1145/2961111.2962635(1-6)Online publication date: 8-Sep-2016
  • Show More Cited By

Index Terms

  1. Empirical evaluation of reliability improvement in an evolving software product line

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

    Information & Contributors

    Information

    Published In

    cover image ACM Conferences
    MSR '11: Proceedings of the 8th Working Conference on Mining Software Repositories
    May 2011
    260 pages
    ISBN:9781450305747
    DOI:10.1145/1985441
    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

    Sponsors

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    Published: 21 May 2011

    Permissions

    Request permissions for this article.

    Check for updates

    Author Tags

    1. change
    2. failures
    3. reliability
    4. reuse
    5. software product lines

    Qualifiers

    • Research-article

    Conference

    ICSE11
    Sponsor:
    ICSE11: International Conference on Software Engineering
    May 21 - 22, 2011
    HI, Waikiki, Honolulu, USA

    Upcoming Conference

    ICSE 2025

    Contributors

    Other Metrics

    Bibliometrics & Citations

    Bibliometrics

    Article Metrics

    • Downloads (Last 12 months)4
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
    Reflects downloads up to 13 Dec 2024

    Other Metrics

    Citations

    Cited By

    View all
    • (2018)Software structure evolution and relation to subgraph defectivenessIET Software10.1049/iet-sen.2018.5060Online publication date: 11-Dec-2018
    • (2017)Do Software Reliability Prediction Models Meet Industrial Perceptions?Proceedings of the 10th Innovations in Software Engineering Conference10.1145/3021460.3021467(66-73)Online publication date: 5-Feb-2017
    • (2016)Evaluating Bug-Fixing in Software Product LinesProceedings of the 10th ACM/IEEE International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement10.1145/2961111.2962635(1-6)Online publication date: 8-Sep-2016
    • (2016)Mutation Operators for Preprocessor-Based VariabilityProceedings of the 10th International Workshop on Variability Modelling of Software-Intensive Systems10.1145/2866614.2866626(81-88)Online publication date: 27-Jan-2016
    • (2016)Assessment and cross-product prediction of software product line qualityAutomated Software Engineering10.1007/s10515-014-0160-423:2(253-302)Online publication date: 1-Jun-2016
    • (2014)Software structure evolution and relation to system defectivenessProceedings of the 18th International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering10.1145/2601248.2601287(1-10)Online publication date: 13-May-2014
    • (2012)A Survey on Mining Software RepositoriesIEICE Transactions on Information and Systems10.1587/transinf.E95.D.1384E95.D:5(1384-1406)Online publication date: 2012
    • (2012)An Empirical Study of Pre-release Software Faults in an Industrial Product LineProceedings of the 2012 IEEE Fifth International Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation10.1109/ICST.2012.98(181-190)Online publication date: 17-Apr-2012
    • (2011)Are change metrics good predictors for an evolving software product line?Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Predictive Models in Software Engineering10.1145/2020390.2020397(1-10)Online publication date: 20-Sep-2011

    View Options

    Login options

    View options

    PDF

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    Media

    Figures

    Other

    Tables

    Share

    Share

    Share this Publication link

    Share on social media