Papers › Teaching Mining Software Repositories

Teaching Mining Software Repositories

3 Jan 2025arXiv:2501.01903links table onlyarchive 2025-07-28

Zadia Codabux, Fatemeh Fard, Roberto Verdecchia, Fabio Palomba, Dario Di Nucci, Gilberto Recupito

The archive published only this paper's code-link row. Authors, date and abstract are from arXiv's metadata (CC0), read from the Kaggle arXiv metadata snapshot of 2026-09-12 where its title matched the archive's; the title is the archive's.

Mining Software Repositories (MSR) has become a popular research area recently. MSR analyzes different sources of data, such as version control systems, code repositories, defect tracking systems, archived communication, deployment logs, and so on, to uncover interesting and actionable insights from the data for improved software development, maintenance, and evolution. This chapter provides an overview of MSR and how to conduct an MSR study, including setting up a study, formulating research goals and questions, identifying repositories, extracting and cleaning the data, performing data analysis and synthesis, and discussing MSR study limitations. Furthermore, the chapter discusses MSR as part of a mixed method study, how to mine data ethically, and gives an overview of recent trends in MSR as well as reflects on the future. As a teaching aid, the chapter provides tips for educators, exercises for students at all levels, and a list of repositories that can be used as a starting point for an MSR study.

PaperPDFCode

Code

analysis-tools-dev/dynamic-analysis officialmentioned in paper report

Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections