skip to main content
10.1145/2961111.2962624acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesesemConference Proceedingsconference-collections
short-paper

Advantages and Disadvantages of using Shared code from the Developers Perspective: A qualitative study

Published: 08 September 2016 Publication History

Abstract

Context: The code ownership has influence on various aspects of software development, such as code quality, cooperation and team knowledge. However, there are few studies from the point of view of developers that seek to understand the advantages and disadvantages of code ownership. Goals: to investigate what are the advantages and disadvantages of practicing shared code ownership from the perspective of the software developers. Methodology: A qualitative study was conducted using a semi-structured interviews in three technology companies with different profiles. We conducted 19 interviews, that were audio recorded and then transcribed. We coded the data using qualitative coding techniques. Results: Considering companies' context, we have found six advantages and six disadvantages of using shared code ownership. Five proposition were presented. Conclusion: It is noted that the practice of shared code ownership, as described in theory, is more suitable for a more experienced programmers teams, who are able to understand codes without assistance. However, the adaptation of the practice, in which the author is consulted before any change is done, it is necessary for less experienced teams, who feel unsecure to modify the code cause other errors for the project.

References

[1]
Abrantes, J. F. and Travassos, G. H. 2011. Common Agile Practices in Software Processes. In International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement. Pages: 355--358. Banff, AB.
[2]
Abrantes, J. F. and Travassos, G. H. 2013. Towards Pertinent Characteristics of Agility and Agile Practices for Software Processes. CLEI Electronic Journal, Volume 16, Number 1, Paper 5.
[3]
Auvinen, J., Back, R., Heidenberg, J., Hirkman, P. and Milovanov, L. 2004. Product-Focused Software Process Improvement. Volume 4034 of the series Lecture Notes in Computer Science pp 79--93. Software Process Improvement with Agile Practices in a Large Telecom Company.
[4]
Beecham, S.; Sharp, H.; Baddoo, N.; Hall, T.; Robinson, H. 2007. Does the XP environment meet the motivational needs of the software developer: An empirical study. Proceedings of AGILE 2007. IEEE. p. 37--49.
[5]
Bird, C., Nagappan, N., Murphy, B., Gall, H. and Devanbu, P. 2011 Don't touch my code!: examining the effects of ownership on software quality. In Proceedings of the 19th ACM SIGSOFT symposium and the 13th European conference on Foundations of software engineering (ESEC/FSE '11). 4--14 ACM, New York, NY, USA.
[6]
Choudhari, J. and Suman U. 2010 Iterative Maintenance Life Cycle Using eXtreme Programming. International Conference on Advances in Recent Technologies in Communication and Computing (ARTCom). Pages: 401--403. Kottayam.
[7]
Choudhari, J. and Suman, U. 2014 Extended iterative maintenance life cycle using eXtreme programming. SIGSOFT Softw. Eng. Notes 39, 11--12.
[8]
Foucault, M., Falleri, J. and Blanc, X. 2014 Code ownership in open-source software. In Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering (EASE '14). ACM, New York, NY, USA, Article 39, 9 pages.
[9]
Greiler, M., Herzig, K. and Czerwonka, J. 2015. Code ownership and software quality: a replication study. In Proceedings of the 12th Working Conference on Mining Software Repositories(MSR '15). IEEE Press, Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2--12.
[10]
Jackson, A., Tsang, S., Gray, A., Driver, C. and Clarke, S. 2004. Behind the Rules: XP Experiences. In Proceedings of the Agile Development Conference (ADC'04). IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA, 87--94.
[11]
Juric, R. Extreme programming and its development practices. 2004. In Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Information Technology Interfaces. Pages: 97--104. Pula, Croatia.
[12]
Maruping, L. M.; Zhang, X.; Venkatesh, V. 2009. Role of collective ownership and coding standards in coordinating expertise in software project teams. In European Journal of Information Systems, 18(4) 355--371.
[13]
Merriam, S. B. 2009. Qualitative Research: a Guide to Design and Implementation. 2. ed. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
[14]
Meyer, B. Agile! The Good, the Hype and the Ugly. Springer, 2014.
[15]
Müller, C. Reina, G and Ertl, T. 2015. In-Situ Visualisation of Fractional Code Ownership over Time. In Proceedings of the 8th International Symposium on Visual Information Communication and Interaction (VINCI '15). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 13--20.
[16]
Rahman, F. and Devanbu, P. 2011 Ownership, experience and defects: a fine-grained study of authorship. 33rd International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE). Page(s): 491--500, Honolulu, HI.
[17]
Ricca, F. and Marchetto, A. 2010. Are Heroes common in FLOSS projects? In Proceedings of the 2010 ACM-IEEE International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement (ESEM '10). ACM, New York, NY, USA, Article 55, 4 pages.
[18]
Shore, J. and Warden, S. 2007. The Art of Agile Development: Pragmatic guide to agile software development. O'Reilly Media.
[19]
Sindhgatta, R., Narendra, N. C. and Sengupta, B. 2010. Software evolution in agile development: a case study. In Proceedings of the ACM international conference companion on Object oriented programming systems languages and applications companion (OOPSLA '10) 105--114. ACM, New York, NY, USA.
[20]
Sletholt, M. T, Hannay, J., Pfahl, D., Benestad, H. C and Langtangen, H. P. 2011. A literature review of agile practices and their effects in scientific software development. In Proceedings of the 4th International Workshop on Software Engineering for Computational Science and Engineering. 1--9. (SECSE '11). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 2011.
[21]
Strauss, A. C; Corbin, J. M. Basics of Qualitative Research: Second Edition: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. Sage Publications, Inc; 3rd edition, 2007.
[22]
Talluri, M. and Haddad, H. M. 2014. Best managerial practices in agile development. In Proceedings of the 2014 ACM Southeast Regional Conference (ACM SE '14). ACM, New York, USA, 2014.
[23]
Wood, S., Michaelides, G. and Thomson, C. 2013. Successful extreme programming. Inf. Softw. Technol. 55, 4 (April 2013), 660--672.

Cited By

View all
  • (2023)Investigating developers’ perception on software testability and its effectsEmpirical Software Engineering10.1007/s10664-023-10373-028:5Online publication date: 13-Sep-2023
  • (2018)The Role of Human in Software Configuration ManagementProceedings of the 2018 7th International Conference on Software and Computer Applications10.1145/3185089.3185117(56-60)Online publication date: 8-Feb-2018
  • (2017)Relating alternate modifications to defect density in software developmentProceedings of the 39th International Conference on Software Engineering Companion10.1109/ICSE-C.2017.132(308-310)Online publication date: 20-May-2017

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences
ESEM '16: Proceedings of the 10th ACM/IEEE International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement
September 2016
457 pages
ISBN:9781450344272
DOI:10.1145/2961111
Publication rights licensed to ACM. ACM acknowledges that this contribution was authored or co-authored by an employee, contractor or affiliate of a national government. As such, the Government retains a nonexclusive, royalty-free right to publish or reproduce this article, or to allow others to do so, for Government purposes only.

Sponsors

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 08 September 2016

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. Code ownership
  2. teamwork

Qualifiers

  • Short-paper
  • Research
  • Refereed limited

Funding Sources

Conference

ESEM '16
Sponsor:

Acceptance Rates

ESEM '16 Paper Acceptance Rate 27 of 122 submissions, 22%;
Overall Acceptance Rate 130 of 594 submissions, 22%

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)23
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)1
Reflects downloads up to 13 Feb 2025

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2023)Investigating developers’ perception on software testability and its effectsEmpirical Software Engineering10.1007/s10664-023-10373-028:5Online publication date: 13-Sep-2023
  • (2018)The Role of Human in Software Configuration ManagementProceedings of the 2018 7th International Conference on Software and Computer Applications10.1145/3185089.3185117(56-60)Online publication date: 8-Feb-2018
  • (2017)Relating alternate modifications to defect density in software developmentProceedings of the 39th International Conference on Software Engineering Companion10.1109/ICSE-C.2017.132(308-310)Online publication date: 20-May-2017

View Options

Login options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Figures

Tables

Media

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media