Agentic AI systems powered by Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly used to autonomously contribute code in modern software development. While prior work has shown that such systems can accelerate development tasks, their reliability and maintenance behavior in real-world Continuous Integration (CI) workflows remain poorly understood. In this study, we analyze 11,771 pull requests (PRs) from GitHub, including 7,619 agentic and 4,152 human-authored PRs, to investigate how agentic code behaves during CI workflows. We examine (1) CI failure rates at the pull-request level, (2) responsibility for introducing and fixing CI failures, and (3) time-to-fix at the commit level using fail–fix mappings. Our results show that human-authored CI fixes exhibit a median time to fix of 71.70 minutes, whereas AI agentic-authored CI fixes resolve failures nearly four times faster, with a median of 17.23 minutes. Our results show that agent-authored fixes resolve CI failures nearly four times faster than human fixes (median 17.23 vs. 71.70 minutes). However, agents introduce most CI failures (79.15%) while performing a smaller share of fixes (60.63%), indicating that human developers remain heavily involved in failure resolution despite faster agent responses.

GitHub Actions (GHA) has become among the most popular Continuous Integration (CI) platforms in open-source software (OSS) and commercial projects. Collecting such build data remains crucial for practitioners and researchers to allow build performance monitoring, optimization and improvement. However, mining GHA builds to collect build-related data and metrics remains challenging and time-consuming. This paper introduces GHAminer, an open-source tool designed to collect build-related metrics for GitHub Actions. GHAminer covers various aspects of data such as the build-related code changes and tests, the build duration and status (e.g., passed, failed, timeout, etc.), and repository metadata, which would be useful for practitioners and researchers to make data-driven decisions to enhance CI efficiency and quality. The tool has a modular architecture that supports efficient data extraction with minimal API load. Specifically, it consists of a set of modules that are related to repository information collection, build analysis, commit history analysis, and build log parsing. We evaluate the performance of GHAminer on a representative sample of 3,151 OSS projects. Results show that GHAminer is efficient in handling projects of various sizes with relatively stable performance to collect build data for larger projects. GHAminer is publicly available with a demo video at: https:lIgithub.com/stilab-ets/GHAminer

Infrastructure-as-Code (IaC) automates the configuration of cloud platforms through code. As business needs evolve, IaC files often become complex, containing hundreds of lines and multiple dependencies. These configurations rely on third-party providers to provision system infrastructure. Practitioners regularly update IaC code to align with evolving cloud provider specifications (i.e., AWS, GCP, Azure) and to address security issues or defects. Although prior work highlights the risks of outdated dependencies, it remains unclear whether IaC practitioners consistently update provider dependencies in accordance with official releases. To address this gap, we conduct a mixed-method empirical study focused on the Amazon Web Services (AWS) provider, one of the most widely used providers for provisioning cloud infrastructures. We analyze 23,404 Terraform (TF) related commits from 194 open-source TF projects, focusing on: (i) technical lag, which captures how long AWS provider dependencies remain unchanged in code; (ii) the frequency of dependency updates; (iii) the code review effort involved in updating AWS provider dependencies; and (iv) the motivations behind such updates. Our findings reveal that Terraform developers frequently rely on outdated provider versions, with the technical lag increasing steadily from 2017 to early 2025, reaching a monthly average of approximately 9 months by 2025. Quantitative analysis reveals that only 1.86% of TF-related commits involve updates to AWS provider dependencies, indicating that such updates are not a priority. Moreover, related code reviews are substantial, affecting a median of 7 files across multiple directories. Through thematic analysis, we identify nine key motivations for updating the AWS provider dependencies, with the top three being: Providers Dependency Management, Terraform Compatibility Management, and Security Management. These insights highlight a clear need for better support and tooling to help practitioners manage provider updates more effectively, minimizing disruption while modernizing infrastructure. We recommend adopting automated dependency management tools and improved update workflows to reduce technical lag and lower the cost of staying up to date.

Modern code review (MCR) is recognized as an effective software quality assurance practice that is broadly adopted by open-source and commercial software projects. MCR is most effective when developers follow best practices, as it improves code quality, enhances knowledge transfer, increases team awareness and shares code ownership. However, prior work highlights that poor code review practices are common and often manifest in the form of low review participation and engagement, shallow review, and toxic communications. To address these issues, we introduce GitRev, a novel approach that applies gamification mechanisms to boost developer motivation and engagement. GitRev is built on top of a Large Language Model (LLM), used as a points-based reward system that leverages the code change context, and code review activities. We implement GitRev as a GitHub app with a web browser extension that consists of a client-side web browser extension that gamifies the GitHub user interface, and a server-side composed of a Node.js server for authentication and data management. To evaluate GitRev, we conduct a controlled experiment with 86 graduate and undergraduate students. Results indicate the promising potential of our approach for improving the code review process and developers' engagement. GitRev is publicly available at https://anonymous.40pen.science/r/GitRev-OB74