In practice, a popular and coarse-grained approach for recovering from a problematic commit is to revert it (i.e., undoing the change). However, reverted commits could induce some issues for software development, such as impeding the development progress and increasing the difficulty for maintenance. In order to mitigate these issues, we set out to explore the following central question: can we characterize and identify which commits will be reverted? In this paper, we characterize commits using 27 commit features and build an identification model to identify commits that will be reverted. We first identify reverted commits by analyzing commit messages and comparing the changed content, and extract 27 commit features that can be divided into three dimensions, namely change, developer and message, respectively. Then, we build an identification model (e.g., random forest) based on the extracted features. To evaluate the effectiveness of our proposed model, we perform an empirical study on ten open source projects including a total of 125,241 commits. Our experimental results show that our model outperforms two baselines in terms of AUC-ROC and cost-effectiveness (i.e., percentage of detected reverted commits when inspecting 20% of total changed LOC). In terms of the average performance across the ten studied projects, our model achieves an AUC-ROC of 0.756 and a cost-effectiveness of 0.746, significantly improving the baselines by substantial margins. In addition, we found that “developer” is the most discriminative dimension among the three dimensions of features for the identification of reverted commits. However, using all the three dimensions of commit features leads to better performance.
Wed 8 JulDisplayed time zone: (UTC) Coordinated Universal Time change
16:05 - 17:05 | A10-Human Aspects 2Journal First / Technical Papers at Baekje Chair(s): Giuseppe Scanniello University of Basilicata | ||
16:05 8mTalk | Characterizing and Identifying Reverted CommitsJ1 Journal First Meng Yan Chongqing University, Xin Xia Monash University, David Lo Singapore Management University, Ahmed E. Hassan Queen's University, Shanping Li Zhejiang University | ||
16:13 8mTalk | An Empirical Study of Obsolete Answers on Stack OverflowJ1 Journal First Haoxiang Zhang Software Analysis and Intelligence Lab (SAIL), Queen’s University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada, Shaowei Wang Mississippi State University, Tse-Hsun (Peter) Chen Concordia University, Ying Zou Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Ahmed E. Hassan Queen's University | ||
16:21 8mTalk | An Empirical Characterization of Bad Practices in Continuous IntegrationJ1 Journal First Fiorella Zampetti University of Sannio, Carmine Vassallo University of Zurich, Sebastiano Panichella Zurich University of Applied Sciences, Gerardo Canfora University of Sannio, Harald Gall University of Zurich, Massimiliano Di Penta University of Sannio Link to publication DOI Pre-print | ||
16:29 8mTalk | To the Attention of Mobile Software Developers: Guess What, Test your App!J1 Journal First Luís Cruz Deflt University of Technology, Rui Abreu Instituto Superior Técnico, U. Lisboa & INESC-ID, David Lo Singapore Management University DOI Pre-print Media Attached | ||
16:37 12mTalk | Primers or Reminders? The Effects of Existing Review Comments on Code ReviewTechnical Technical Papers Davide Spadini Delft University of Technology, Netherlands, Gül Calikli Chalmers | University of Gothenburg, Alberto Bacchelli University of Zurich DOI Pre-print Media Attached |