To Share, or Not to Share: Exploring Test-Case Reusability in Fork Ecosystems
Mukelabai Mukelabai, Christoph Derks, Jacob Krüger, Thorsten Berger
Abstract
Code is often reused to facilitate collaborative development, to create software variants, to experiment with new ideas, or to develop new features in isolation. Social-coding platforms, such as GitHub, enable enhanced code reuse with forking, pull requests, and cross-project traceability. With these concepts, forking has become a common strategy to reuse code by creating clones (i.e., forks) of projects. Thereby, forking establishes fork ecosystems of co-existing projects that are similar, but developed in parallel, often with rather sporadic code propagation and synchronization. Consequently, forked projects vary in quality and often involve redundant development efforts. Unfortunately, as we will show, many projects do not benefit from test cases created in other forks, even though those test cases could actually be reused to enhance the quality of other projects. We believe that reusing test cases—in addition to the implementation code—can improve software quality, software maintainability, and coding efficiency in fork ecosystems. While researchers have worked on test-case-reuse techniques, their potential to improve the quality of real fork ecosystems is unknown. To shed light on test-case reusability, we study to what extent test cases can be reused across forked projects. We mined a dataset of test cases from 305 fork ecosystems on GitHub—totaling 1,089 projects—and assessed the potential for reusing these test cases among the forked projects. By performing a manual inspection of the test cases' applicability, by transplanting the test cases, and by analyzing the causes of non-applicability, we contribute an understanding of the benefits (e.g., uncovering bugs) and of the challenges (e.g., automated code transplantation, deciding about applicability) of reusing test cases in fork ecosystems.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext d765cb70-a594-425b-9311-08afbc44d4dbBuilds on4
- An empirical analysis of the costs of clone- and platform-oriented software reuseJacob Krüger, Thorsten BergerFSE 2020 · 81 citations
- FrUITeR: a framework for evaluating UI test reuseYixue Zhao, Justin Chen, Adriana Sejfia, Marcelo Schmitt Laser et al.FSE 2020 · 33 citations
- How has forking changed in the last 20 years?: a study of hard forks on GitHubShurui Zhou, Bogdan Vasilescu, Christian KästnerICSE 2020 · 33 citations
- Seamless Variability Management With the Virtual PlatformWardah Mahmood, Daniel Strüber, Thorsten Berger, Ralf Lämmel et al.ICSE 2021 · 23 citations
Related papers
- Same File, Different Changes: The Potential of Meta-Maintenance on GitHubHideaki Hata, Raula Gaikovina Kula, Takashi Ishio, Christoph TreudeICSE 2021 · 12 citations
- Measuring the Effects of Stack Overflow Code Snippet Evolution on Open-Source Software SecurityAlfusainey Jallow, Michael Schilling, Michael Backes, Sven BugielS&P 2024 · 6 citations
- PaReco: patched clones and missed patches among the divergent variants of a software familyPoedjadevie Kadjel Ramkisoen, John Businge, Brent van Bladel, Alexandre Decan et al.FSE 2022 · 8 citations
- MUT: Human-in-the-Loop Unit Test MigrationYi Gao, Xing Hu, Tongtong Xu, Xin Xia et al.ICSE 2024 · 3 citations
- Fork Entropy: Assessing the Diversity of Open Source Software Projects' ForksLiang Wang, Zhiwen Zheng, Xiangchen Wu, Baihui Sang et al.ASE 2023 · 8 citations
