Expertise-Based Developer Assignment for Long-Term Software Components in Open-Source Projects

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2608.05919v1
• Date: Thu, 06 Aug 2026 11:44:19 GMT
• Title: Expertise-Based Developer Assignment for Long-Term Software Components in Open-Source Projects
• Abstract summary: This paper produces a web application that models developers' expertise based on their previous Git commits.<n>The system's speed varies depending on the back-end model used but server-side data caching improved worst-case speeds by a factor of 9.86.
• Score: 1.8967538025776642
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Open-source software development through GitHub has enabled countless software projects to be developed by developers from across the world. Assigning the right task to the right developer enables teams to work efficiently. Assigning a task which is not representative of a developer's expertise results in slower completion time and less maintainable code. Whilst much work has been done to automate this assignment for specific jobs, there is little work addressing the assignment of developers to expertise-specific long-term components of a new project. This paper produces a web application that models developers' expertise based on their previous Git commits and automatically assigns them to an optimal task within a new project. Testing showed that the system's speed varies depending on the back-end model used but server-side data caching improved worst-case speeds by a factor of 9.86. 72.4% of tasks had their target developer listed in the top 10, out of a possible 47.

Related papers

• On the GitHub Actions Language: Usage, Evolution, and Workflow Reliability [44.257027748554606]
  This paper empirically explores how the adoption and evolution of GitHub Actions language constructs impacts workflow reliability and maintainability.<n>We quantitatively analyse 260K from 49K GitHub repositories to understand how they are used in practice and how their usage has evolved from July 2019 to August 2025.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-26T10:43:14Z)
• RoadmapBench: Evaluating Long-Horizon Agentic Software Development Across Version Upgrades [32.04167306620878]
  We present RoadmapBench, a benchmark of 115 long-horizon coding tasks grounded in real open-source version upgrades.<n>Each task places the agent on a source-version code snapshot and provides a multi-target roadmap instruction.<n>We find that even the strongest, Claude-Opus-4.7, resolves only 39.1% of tasks, while the weakest iteration achieves merely 5.2%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-15T11:00:33Z)
• ProgramBench: Can Language Models Rebuild Programs From Scratch? [59.40748183470308]
  ProgramBench measures the ability of software engineering agents to develop software holisitically.<n>End-to-end behavioral tests are generated via agent-driven fuzzing.<n>Models favor monolithic, single-file implementations that diverge sharply from human-written code.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-05T09:17:02Z)
• ProjDevBench: Benchmarking AI Coding Agents on End-to-End Project Development [49.63491095660809]
  ProjDevBench is an end-to-end benchmark that provides project requirements to coding agents and evaluates the resulting repositories.<n>We curate 20 programming problems across 8 categories, covering both concept-oriented tasks and real-world application scenarios.<n>Our evaluation reports an overall acceptance rate of 27.38%: agents handle basic functionality but struggle with complex system design, time optimization, and resource management.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-02T05:17:23Z)
• Agentic Much? Adoption of Coding Agents on GitHub [6.395990525268647]
  We present the first large-scale study of the adoption of coding agents on GitHub.<n>We find an estimated adoption rate of 15.85%--22.60%, which is very high for a technology only a few months old--and increasing.<n>At the commit level, we find that commits assisted by coding agents are larger than commits only authored by human developers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-26T10:28:10Z)
• SWE-EVO: Benchmarking Coding Agents in Long-Horizon Software Evolution Scenarios [6.776894728701934]
  Existing benchmarks for AI coding agents focus on isolated, single-issue tasks such as fixing a bug or implementing a small feature.<n>We introduce SWE-EVO, a benchmark that evaluates agents on a long-horizon software evolution challenge.<n>Tool comprises 48 evolution tasks that require agents to implement multi-step modifications spanning an average of 21 files.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-20T19:08:15Z)
• NL2Repo-Bench: Towards Long-Horizon Repository Generation Evaluation of Coding Agents [79.29376673236142]
  Existing benchmarks fail to rigorously evaluate the long-horizon capabilities required to build complete software systems.<n>We present NL2Repo Bench, a benchmark explicitly designed to evaluate the long-horizon repository generation ability of coding agents.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-14T15:12:13Z)
• Code with Me or for Me? How Increasing AI Automation Transforms Developer Workflows [60.04362496037186]
  We present the first controlled study of developer interactions with coding agents.<n>We evaluate two leading copilot and agentic coding assistants.<n>Our results show agents can assist developers in ways that surpass copilots.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-10T20:12:54Z)
• Codev-Bench: How Do LLMs Understand Developer-Centric Code Completion? [60.84912551069379]
  We present the Code-Development Benchmark (Codev-Bench), a fine-grained, real-world, repository-level, and developer-centric evaluation framework. Codev-Agent is an agent-based system that automates repository crawling, constructs execution environments, extracts dynamic calling chains from existing unit tests, and generates new test samples to avoid data leakage.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-02T09:11:10Z)
• Transforming Software Development: Evaluating the Efficiency and Challenges of GitHub Copilot in Real-World Projects [0.0]
  GitHub Copilot is an AI-powered coding assistant. This study evaluates the efficiency gains, areas for improvement, and emerging challenges of using GitHub Copilot.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-25T19:51:21Z)
• 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)

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.