Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Software Development Bug Tracking: “Tool Isn’t User Friendly” or “User Isn’t Process Friendly”

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Software Quality — ECSQ 2002 (ECSQ 2002)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 2349))

Included in the following conference series:

  • 718 Accesses

Abstract

In this article we describe the implementation of software development bug tracking via WebPT/Continuus, in a development organization of about 200 developers, testers and managers of various ranks. We emphasize the interplay of technology, procedures and human nature, and describe our experiences and lessons on how this interplay affects the continuous quality improvement process. Often times, the implementer hears complaints about the tool not being user-friendly. In some cases, the implementer — committed to the tool — will perceive this as a case of a user being not process-friendly. Both responses may have a high emotional content. Who is right?

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Paulk M.C., Weber C.V, Garcia S.M., Chrissis M., Bush M.: Capability Maturity Model (CMM), CMU/SEI-93-TR-25, Carnegie Mellon University, Feb. 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Continuus/CM: Problem tracking and Task Reference, PTTR-041-011, 1999

    Google Scholar 

  3. Rational: ClearQuest, http://www.rational.com/products/clearquest/index.jsp

  4. MetaQuest: http://www.metaquest.com

  5. Fenton, N.E., Neil, M.: A critique of software defect prediction models, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, Vol. 25 Issue 5 (1999) 675–689

    Google Scholar 

  6. McConnell, S: Gauging software readiness with defect tracking, IEEE Software, Vol. 14 Issue 3 (1997) 136, 135

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Monteiro, A., Almeida, A.B., Goulao, M., Abreu, F.B., Sousa, P.: A software defect report and tracking system in an intranet, The Third European Conference on Software Maintenance and Reengineering Proceedings, Amsterdam Netherlands (1999) 198–201

    Google Scholar 

  8. Wohlin, C., Wesslen, A.: Understanding software defect detection in the Personal Software Process, The Ninth International Symposium on Software Reliability Engineering Proceedings, 1998. Paderborn Germany (1998) 49–58

    Google Scholar 

  9. Thomas, S.A., Hurley, S.F., Barnes, D.J.: Looking for the human factors in software quality management, International Conference on Software Engineering: Education and Practice Proceedings (1996) 474–480

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Software Engineering, Jerusalem College of Engineering, P.O.B 3566, 91035, Jerusalem, Israel

    Leah Goldin

  2. CEM, NICE Systems Ltd., P.O.B 690, 43107, Ra’anana, Israel

    Lilach Rochell

Authors
  1. Leah Goldin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Lilach Rochell
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Nokia Research Center, Nokia Group, Nokia Group, P. O. Box 407, 00045, Finland

    Jyrki Kontio

  2. Department of Computer and Information Science (IDI), Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Gloeshaugen, 7491, Trondheim, Norway

    Reidar Conradi

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2002 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Goldin, L., Rochell, L. (2002). Software Development Bug Tracking: “Tool Isn’t User Friendly” or “User Isn’t Process Friendly”. In: Kontio, J., Conradi, R. (eds) Software Quality — ECSQ 2002. ECSQ 2002. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 2349. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-47984-8_26

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-47984-8_26

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-43749-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-47984-0

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation