IMPLEMENTING CONTINUOUS CODE QUALITY FOR CODE QUALITY DEVELOPMENT IN THE SCRUM TEAM

There are challenges and drawbacks that will be faced in implementing a Scrum method. One of the problems is in Code Quality because the team only has a short time in each sprint. This causes the team to not be able to conduct a thorough code review, resulting in the team having to increase their workload and pressure. Code review is necessary to identify defects in the code before it goes into the core of the project. But the cumbersome, time-consuming and labor-intensive nature of code review causes a barrier in adopting code review practices properly. To simplify and speed up code review, the researcher will try to implement Continuous Code Quality (CCQ) with the Scrum process by conducting empirical experiments. By examining the effect on the speed of the process and knowing the point of view of the development team. Based on the experiments conducted, the CCQ automation system helps the development team in speeding up the code review process and maintaining good code quality. The biggest influence on the speed of the process remains in the complexity of the system built in a running sprint. Even with an automated code review system, a manual code review process is still needed to ensure there are no errors that cannot be detected by the automated system

Quality Properties of Execution Tracing, an Empirical Study

The authors are grateful to all the professionals who participated in the focus groups; moreover, they also express special thanks to the management of the companies involved for making the organisation of the focus groups possible.Data are made available in the appendix including the results of the data coding process.The quality of execution tracing impacts the time to a great extent to locate errors in software components; moreover, execution tracing is the most suitable tool, in the majority of the cases, for doing postmortem analysis of failures in the field. Nevertheless, software product quality models do not adequately consider execution tracing quality at present neither do they define the quality properties of this important entity in an acceptable manner. Defining these quality properties would be the first step towards creating a quality model for execution tracing. The current research fills this gap by identifying and defining the variables, i.e., the quality properties, on the basis of which the quality of execution tracing can be judged. The present study analyses the experiences of software professionals in focus groups at multinational companies, and also scrutinises the literature to elicit the mentioned quality properties. Moreover, the present study also contributes to knowledge with the combination of methods while computing the saturation point for determining the number of the necessary focus groups. Furthermore, to pay special attention to validity, in addition to the the indicators of qualitative research: credibility, transferability, dependability, and confirmability, the authors also considered content, construct, internal and external validity

Practical Consequences of Quality Views in Assessing Software Quality

open access articleThe authors’ previously published research delved into the theory of software product quality modelling, model views, concepts, and terminologies. They also analysed this specific field from the point of view of uncertainty, and possible descriptions based on fuzzy set theory and fuzzy logic. Laying a theoretical foundation was necessary; however, software professionals need a more tangible and practical approach for their everyday work. Consequently, the authors devote this paper to filling in this gap; it aims to illustrate how to interpret and utilise the previous findings, including the established taxonomy of the software product quality models. The developed fuzzy model’s simplification is also presented with a Generalized Additive Model approximation. The paper does not require any formal knowledge of uncertainty computations and reasoning under uncertainty, nor does it need a deep understanding of quality modelling in terms of terminology, concepts, and meta-models, which were necessary to prepare the taxonomy and relevance ranking. The paper investigates how to determine the validity of statements based on a given software product quality model; moreover, it considers how to tailor and adjust quality models to the particular project’s needs. The paper also describes how to apply different software product quality models for different quality views to take advantage of the automation potential offered for the measurement and assessment of source code quality. Furthermore, frequent pitfalls are illustrated with their corresponding resolutions, including an unmeasured quality property that is found to be important and needs to be included in the measurement and assessment process

Introduction of static quality analysis in small- and medium-sized software enterprises: experiences from technology transfer

Today, small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in the software industry face major challenges. Their resource constraints require high efficiency in development. Furthermore, quality assurance (QA) measures need to be taken to mitigate the risk of additional, expensive effort for bug fixes or compensations. Automated static analysis (ASA) can reduce this risk because it promises low application effort. SMEs seem to take little advantage of this opportunity. Instead, they still mainly rely on the dynamic analysis approach of software testing. In this article, we report on our experiences from a technology transfer project. Our aim was to evaluate the results static analysis can provide for SMEs as well as the problems that occur when introducing and using static analysis in SMEs. We analysed five software projects from five collaborating SMEs using three different ASA techniques: code clone detection, bug pattern detection and architecture conformance analysis. Following the analysis, we applied a quality model to aggregate and evaluate the results. Our study shows that the effort required to introduce ASA techniques in SMEs is small (mostly below one person-hour each). Furthermore, we encountered only few technical problems. By means of the analyses, we could detect multiple defects in production code. The participating companies perceived the analysis results to be a helpful addition to their current QA and will include the analyses in their QA process. With the help of the Quamoco quality model, we could efficiently aggregate and rate static analysis results. However, we also encountered a partial mismatch with the opinions of the SMEs. We conclude that ASA and quality models can be a valuable and affordable addition to the QA process of SMEs