Sharing Software-Evolution Datasets: Practices, Challenges, and Recommendations
David Broneske, Sebastian Kittan, Jacob Krüger
Abstract
Sharing research artifacts (e.g., software, data, protocols) is an immensely important topic for improving transparency, replicability, and reusability in research, and has recently gained more and more traction in software engineering. For instance, recent studies have focused on artifact reviewing, the impact of open science, and specific legal or ethical issues of sharing artifacts.Most of such studies are concerned with artifacts created by the researchers themselves (e.g., scripts, algorithms, tools) and processes for quality assuring these artifacts (e.g., through artifact-evaluation committees). In contrast, the practices and challenges of sharing software-evolution datasets (i.e., republished version-control data with person-related information) have only been scratched in such works. To tackle this gap, we conducted a meta study of software-evolution datasets published at the International Conference on Mining Software Repositories from 2017 until 2021 and snowballed a set of papers that build upon these datasets. Investigating 200 papers, we elicited what types of software-evolution datasets have been shared following what practices and what challenges researchers experienced with sharing or using the datasets. We discussed our findings with an authority on research-data management and ethics reviews through a semi-structured interview to put the practices and challenges into context. Through our meta study, we provide an overview of the sharing practices for software-evolution datasets and the corresponding challenges. The expert interview enriched this analysis by discussing how to solve the challenges and by defining recommendations for sharing software-evolution datasets in the future. Our results extend and complement current research, and we are confident that they can help researchers share software-evolution datasets (as well as datasets involving the same types of data) in a reliable, ethical, and trustworthy way.
Ask about this paper
Ask your agent about it.
Lune has read the top-tier papers around this one, so every answer names the papers it rests on.
Your agent calls
Lunesearch_papers
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers get c8fdd370-ef52-4729-a0ce-602b18f18e17Related papers
- The State of Open Science in Software Engineering Research: A Case Study of ICSE ArtifactsAl Muttakin, Saikat Mondal, Chanchal K. RoyICSE 2026
- Data to Infinity and Beyond: Examining Data Sharing and Reuse Practices in the Computer Security CommunityAnna Crowder, Allison Lu, Kevin Childs, Carson Stillman et al.S&P 2025
- RegMiner: towards constructing a large regression dataset from code evolution historyXuezhi Song, Yun Lin, Siang Hwee Ng, Yijian Wu et al.ISSTA 2022 · 11 citations
- Community expectations for research artifacts and evaluation processesBen Hermann, Stefan Winter, Janet SiegmundFSE 2020 · 40 citations
- A retrospective study of one decade of artifact evaluationsStefan Winter, Christopher Steven Timperley, Ben Hermann, Jürgen Cito et al.FSE 2022 · 21 citations
