The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Work Practices and Challenges in Pull-Based Development: The Integrator's Perspective
Open accessAbstract
In the pull-based development model, the integrator has the crucial role of managing and integrating contributions. This work focuses on the role of the integrator and investigates working habits and challenges alike. We set up an exploratory qualitative study involving a large-scale survey of 749 integrators, to which we add quantitative data from the integrator's project. Our results provide insights into the factors they consider in their decision making process to accept or reject a contribution. Our key findings are that integrators struggle to maintain the quality of their projects and have difficulties with prioritizing contributions that are to be merged. Our insights have implications for practitioners who wish to use or improve their pull-based development process, as well as for researchers striving to understand the theoretical implications of the pull-based model in software development.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Social coding in GitHub: transparency and collaboration in an open software repository
Dabbish, L., Stuart, C., Tsay, J., & Herbsleb, J. (2012) · Proceedings of the ACM 2012 conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work · doi:10.1145/2145204.2145396 · Cited by 999
Contrasting Community Building in Sponsored and Community Founded Open Source Projects
West, J., & O'Mahony, S. (2005) · Proceedings of the 38th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences · doi:10.1109/hicss.2005.166 · Cited by 144
Cited by
Quality and productivity outcomes relating to continuous integration in GitHub
Vasilescu, B., Yu, Y., Wang, H., Devanbu, P., & Filkov, V. (2015) · Proceedings of the 2015 10th Joint Meeting on Foundations of Software Engineering · doi:10.1145/2786805.2786850 · Cited by 406
Measure it? Manage it? Ignore it? software practitioners and technical debt
Ernst, N. A., Bellomo, S., Ozkaya, I., Nord, R. L., & Gorton, I. (2015) · Proceedings of the 2015 10th Joint Meeting on Foundations of Software Engineering · doi:10.1145/2786805.2786848 · Cited by 260
A Large-Scale Survey on the Usability of AI Programming Assistants: Successes and Challenges
Liang, J. T., Yang, C., & Myers, B. A. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2303.17125 · Cited by 206
A Large-Scale Survey on the Usability of AI Programming Assistants: Successes and Challenges
Liang, J. T., Yang, C., & Myers, B. A. (2024) · Proceedings of the IEEE/ACM 46th International Conference on Software Engineering · doi:10.1145/3597503.3608128 · Cited by 203
Code review quality: how developers see it
Kononenko, O., Baysal, O., & Godfrey, M. W. (2016) · Proceedings of the 38th International Conference on Software Engineering · doi:10.1145/2884781.2884840 · Cited by 183
Metadata
- Authors
- Gousios, G., Zaidman, A., Storey, M.-A., & Deursen, A. V.
- Venue
- 2015 IEEE/ACM 37th IEEE International Conference on Software Engineering
- Publisher
- IEEE
- Published
- 2015-05
- Pages
- 358-368
- ISSN
- 0270-5257 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1592081868
- Cited by
- 312
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 27.77
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Work Practices and Challenges in Pull-Based Development: The Integrator's Perspective. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/icse.2015.55
- The paper
- Gousios, G., Zaidman, A., Storey, M.-A., & Deursen, A. V. (2015). Work Practices and Challenges in Pull-Based Development: The Integrator's Perspective. 2015 IEEE/ACM 37th IEEE International Conference on Software Engineering. https://doi.org/10.1109/icse.2015.55
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
