Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Dane Bertram

dblp:33/7128 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
1as first author
0since 2021 · last 2010
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Human-computer interaction and ubiquitous computing · 1 · 1 first-author

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Human-computer interaction and pervasive computing
1 paper
Collaborative and social computing · 100%
Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
1 paper
Software maintenance and evolution · 100%

Topics — the 1 heaviest of 2, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Software maintenance and evolution › issue tracking
bug reports
0.012010
Communication, collaboration, and bugs: the social nature of issue tracking in small, collocated teams · CSCW 2010

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

qualitative study · 0.2
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2010 Communication, collaboration, and bugs: the social nature of issue tracking in small, collocated teams
abstract
Issue tracking systems help organizations manage issue reporting, assignment, tracking, resolution, and archiving. Traditionally, it is the Software Engineering community that researches issue tracking systems, where software defects are reported and tracked as 'bug reports' within an archival database. Yet, as issue tracking is fundamentally a social process, it is important to understand the design and use of issue tracking systems from that perspective. Consequently, we conducted a qualitative study of issue tracking systems as used by small, collocated software development teams. We found that an issue tracker is not just a database for tracking bugs, features, and inquiries, but also a focal point for communication and coordination for many stakeholders within and beyond the software team. Customers, project managers, quality assurance personnel, and programmers all contribute to the shared knowledge and persistent communication that exists within the issue tracking system. These results were all the more striking because in spite of teams being collocated--which afforded frequent, face-to-face communication--the issue tracker was still used as a fundamental communication channel. We articulate various real-world practices surrounding issue trackers and offer design considerations for future systems.
Dane Bertram, Amy Voida, Saul Greenberg, Robert J. Walker
CSCW1