mebug
URL
Change Log
| When | What |
|---|---|
| March 12, 2015 | Donated by Mona Erfani Joorabchi |
Reference
Studies who have been using the data (in any form) are required to add the following reference to their report/paper:
@inproceedings{erfani2014works,
title={Works for me! Characterizing non-reproducible bug reports},
author={Erfani Joorabchi, Mona and Mirzaaghaei, Mehdi and Mesbah, Ali},
booktitle={Proceedings of the 11th Working Conference on Mining Software Repositories},
pages={62--71},
year={2014},
organization={ACM}
}
About the Data
To ensure representativeness, there are five popular, actively maintained software projects from three separate domains, namely desktop (Firefox and Eclipse), web (MediaWiki and Moodle), and mobile (Firefox Android). In addition, one commercial closed source application (Industrial) is included. The proprietary bug tracking system is from a Vancouver-based mobile app development company. The bug reports are filed by their testing team and end-users, and are related to different mobile platforms such as An- droid, Blackberry, iOS, and Windows Phone, as well as their content management platform and backend software.
Abstract
Bug repository systems have become an integral component of software development activities. Ideally, each bug report should help developers to find and fix a software fault. However, there is a subset of reported bugs that is not (easily) re-producible, on which developers spend considerable amounts of time and effort. We present an empirical analysis of non- reproducible bug reports to characterize their rate, nature, and root causes. We mine one industrial and five open-source bug repositories, resulting in 32K non-reproducible bug reports. We (1) compare properties of non-reproducible reports with their counterparts such as active time and number of authors, (2) investigate their life-cycle patterns, and (3) examine 120 Fixed non-reproducible reports. In addition, we qualitatively classify a set of randomly selected non-reproducible bug reports (1,643) into six common categories. Our results show that, on average, non-reproducible bug reports pertain to 17% of all bug reports, remain active three months longer than their counterparts, can be mainly (45%) classified as “Interbug Dependencies”, and 66% of Fixed non-reproducible reports were indeed reproduced and fixed.