GitHub Actions: The Impact on the Pull Request Process

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2206.14118v3
• Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2023 12:10:05 GMT
• Title: GitHub Actions: The Impact on the Pull Request Process
• Authors: Mairieli Wessel, Joseph Vargovich, Marco A. Gerosa, and Christoph Treude
• Abstract summary: This study investigates how projects use GitHub Actions, what the developers discuss about them, and how project activity indicators change after their adoption. Our results indicate that 1,489 out of 5,000 most popular repositories (almost 30% of our sample) adopt GitHub Actions. Our findings also suggest that the adoption of GitHub Actions leads to more rejections of pull requests (PRs), more communication in accepted PRs and less communication in rejected PRs.
• Score: 7.047566396769727
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Software projects frequently use automation tools to perform repetitive activities in the distributed software development process. Recently, GitHub introduced GitHub Actions, a feature providing automated workflows for software projects. Understanding and anticipating the effects of adopting such technology is important for planning and management. Our research investigates how projects use GitHub Actions, what the developers discuss about them, and how project activity indicators change after their adoption. Our results indicate that 1,489 out of 5,000 most popular repositories (almost 30% of our sample) adopt GitHub Actions and that developers frequently ask for help implementing them. Our findings also suggest that the adoption of GitHub Actions leads to more rejections of pull requests (PRs), more communication in accepted PRs and less communication in rejected PRs, fewer commits in accepted PRs and more commits in rejected PRs, and more time to accept a PR. We found similar results when segmenting our results by categories of GitHub Actions. We suggest practitioners consider these effects when adopting GitHub Actions on their projects.

Related papers

• Automatic Categorization of GitHub Actions with Transformers and Few-shot Learning [12.254055731378045]
  GitHub Actions (GHA) have been conceived to provide developers with a practical tool to create and maintain a pipeline. To expose actions to search engines, GitHub allows developers to assign them to one or more categories manually. We propose Gavel, a practical solution to increasing the visibility of actions in GitHub.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-24T02:27:36Z)
• Impact of the Availability of ChatGPT on Software Development: A Synthetic Difference in Differences Estimation using GitHub Data [49.1574468325115]
  ChatGPT is an AI tool that enhances software production efficiency. We estimate ChatGPT's effects on the number of git pushes, repositories, and unique developers per 100,000 people. These results suggest that AI tools like ChatGPT can substantially boost developer productivity, though further analysis is needed to address potential downsides such as low quality code and privacy concerns.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-16T19:11:15Z)
• MAGIS: LLM-Based Multi-Agent Framework for GitHub Issue Resolution [47.850418420195304]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown promise in code generation but face difficulties in resolving GitHub issues. We propose a novel Multi-Agent framework for GitHub Issue reSolution, MAGIS, consisting of four agents customized for software evolution.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-26T17:57:57Z)
• DevEval: Evaluating Code Generation in Practical Software Projects [52.16841274646796]
  We propose a new benchmark named DevEval, aligned with Developers' experiences in practical projects. DevEval is collected through a rigorous pipeline, containing 2,690 samples from 119 practical projects. We assess five popular LLMs on DevEval and reveal their actual abilities in code generation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-12T06:51:30Z)
• GitAgent: Facilitating Autonomous Agent with GitHub by Tool Extension [81.44231422624055]
  A growing area of research focuses on Large Language Models (LLMs) equipped with external tools capable of performing diverse tasks. In this paper, we introduce GitAgent, an agent capable of achieving the autonomous tool extension from GitHub.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-28T15:47:30Z)
• How do Software Engineering Researchers Use GitHub? An Empirical Study of Artifacts & Impact [0.2209921757303168]
  We ask whether and how authors engage in social coding related to their research. Ten thousand papers in top SE research venues, hand-annotating their GitHub links, and studying 309 paper-related repositories. We find a wide distribution in popularity and impact, some strongly correlated with publication venue.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-02T18:56:33Z)
• The GitHub Development Workflow Automation Ecosystems [47.818229204130596]
  Large-scale software development has become a highly collaborative endeavour. This chapter explores the ecosystems of development bots and GitHub Actions. It provides an extensive survey of the state-of-the-art in this domain.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-08T15:24:23Z)
• Automatically Categorising GitHub Repositories by Application Domain [14.265666415804025]
  GitHub is the largest host of open source software on the Internet. It is becoming increasingly hard to navigate the plethora of repositories which span a wide range of domains. Past work has shown that taking the application domain into account is crucial for tasks such as predicting the popularity of a repository.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-07-30T16:27:16Z)
• Predicting Issue Types on GitHub [8.791809365994682]
  Ticket Tagger is a GitHub app analyzing the issue title and description through machine learning techniques. We empirically evaluated the tool's prediction performance on about 30,000 GitHub issues.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-07-21T08:14:48Z)
• GitHub Discussions: An Exploratory Study of Early Adoption [23.844242004415406]
  We conducted a mixed-methods study based on early adopters of GitHub discussions from January until July 2020. We found that: (1) errors, unexpected behavior, and code reviews are prevalent discussion categories; (2) there is a positive relationship between project member involvement and discussion frequency; (3) developers consider GitHub Discussions useful but face the problem of topic duplication between Discussions and Issues. Our findings are a first step towards data-informed guidance for using GitHub Discussions, opening up avenues for future work on this novel communication channel.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-02-10T02:49:03Z)
• A ground-truth dataset and classification model for detecting bots in GitHub issue and PR comments [70.1864008701113]
  Bots are used in Github repositories to automate repetitive activities that are part of the distributed software development process. This paper proposes a ground-truth dataset, based on a manual analysis with high interrater agreement, of pull request and issue comments in 5,000 distinct Github accounts. We propose an automated classification model to detect bots, taking as main features the number of empty and non-empty comments of each account, the number of comment patterns, and the inequality between comments within comment patterns.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-07T09:30:52Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.