Download as
Browse Code »

Commit c06562a46b6901288404a739640c900e8e65b8fd

Authored by Melissa Wen
1 parent 9bc68b0f
Exists in master and in 3 other branches oss_2018, oss_2018_siqueira, rework_case_study

[oss-2018] grammarly results

Showing 1 changed file with 20 additions and 20 deletions   Show diff stats
icse2018/content/05-results.tex
  Diff comments   View file @c06562a
... ... @@ -24,14 +24,14 @@ feature was used for meeting logging, defining goals, sprint planning, and
24 24 documentation of deployment processes and administration resources guide. Issue
25 25 tracker was used for discussing requirements, monitoring the features under
26 26 development, registering changes, and validating functionalities delivered. Finally, the
27   -whole team used Mailing list to defining schedules of meetings and deliveries
28   -and also to collaborative definition of requirements.
  27 +whole team used the Mailing list to defining schedules of meetings and deliveries
  28 +and also to the collaborative definition of requirements.
29 29  
30   -Our surveys reports Mailing list (100\%) and Issue Tracker (62.5\%) as the main means
  30 +Our surveys report Mailing list (100\%) and Issue Tracker (62.5\%) as the main means
31 31 of interaction between senior developers and undergraduates. Developers and MPOG
32 32 staff also interacted mostly via Mailing List (87.5\%) and Issue tracker (50\%).
33 33 According to research findings, this movement made \textbf{communication more
34   -transparent and efficient}. A MPOG IT analyst said that the
  34 +transparent and efficient}. An MPOG IT analyst said that the
35 35 \textit{``Communicating well goes far beyond the speed, it is someone being able
36 36 to communicate to everyone everything that is happening in the project. We did
37 37 not use emails. We use more mailing list and avoid e-mails. It helped a lot
... ... @@ -39,22 +39,22 @@ because everything was public and did not pollute our mailbox. You wanted to
39 39 know something, could go there and look at what was happening''}.
40 40  
41 41 Migrating to SPB platform also provided an \textbf{easier monitoring and
42   -increase interactions between development team and public servants by
  42 +increase interactions between the development team and public servants by
43 43 coordinators}. As shown by collected data, in the last 15 months of the project,
44 44 the issues have 59 different authors (8 from MPOG
45 45 staff), and commented by 64 different users (9 from MPOG staff and users).
46   -Considering issues with higher level of interaction those that have 10 or more
  46 +Considering issues with a higher level of interaction those that have 10 or more
47 47 comments, in a set of 102 issues, MPOG staff authored 43 issues (which represents
48   -42\% of these most active issues). A MPOG analyst highlighted that
  48 +42\% of these most active issues). An MPOG analyst highlighted that
49 49 \textit{``there was a lot of evolution, a lot of communication via Gitlab''}.
50 50 This interaction also led MPOG staff to \textbf{trust developed code}:
51   -\textit{``Everything was validated, we tested the features and the project was
52   -developed inside the platform, so that the feature was validated in the
53   -development of the software itself. From the moment we installed it, and
  51 +\textit{``Everything was validated, we tested the features and developed the project
  52 +inside the platform, so that the feature was validated in the
  53 +development of the software itself. From the moment we installed it and
54 54 began to use it for development, this validation was constant. We felt confident
55 55 in the features''}.
56 56  
57   -One of the main concerns of traditional approach is meticulous documentation of
  57 +One of the main concerns of traditional approaches is meticulous documentation of
58 58 the software designed and the development steps. With this aforementioned
59 59 decision, we could meet this government demand without bureaucracies and changes
60 60 in our development process, \textbf{producting organically documentation and
... ... @@ -66,7 +66,7 @@ see how it worked, how someone did something. We can recover those good points''
66 66 \subsection{Bringing together government staff and development team}
67 67  
68 68 The MPOG analysts observed communication noise in the dialogue between them and
69   -their superiors and in the dialogues with the development team that were
  69 +their superiors and in dialogues with the development team,
70 70 intermediated by the superiors. They said that direct dialogue with the
71 71 development team and biweekly visits to the university's lab \textbf{reduce
72 72 communication misunderstood}: \textit{``At this point, the communication started to
... ... @@ -74,7 +74,7 @@ change.. started to improve''}. According to another interviewee, this new
74 74 dynamic unified the two sides: \textit{``I believe it was very positive, we also liked to
75 75 go there, to interact with the team. I think it brought more unity, more
76 76 integration into the project''}. The participation of the MPOG staff was also
77   -considered positive by {72.9\%} of the undegraduates and to {81.1\%} of them
  77 +considered positive by {72.9\%} of the undergraduates and to {81.1\%} of them
78 78 think the presence of MPOG staff in sprint ceremonies was important for the
79 79 development. In addition, to \textbf{better meet expectations of both sides}
80 80 regarding the requirements developed, {75.6\%} of students believe that writing
... ... @@ -82,7 +82,7 @@ the requirements together with the MPOG staff was very important. According to
82 82 one of them \textit{``Joint planning and timely meetings were very important for
83 83 understanding the needs of MPOG''}.
84 84  
85   -An imported consequence of this direct government-academia interaction in
  85 +An imported consequence of this direct government-academia interaction in the
86 86 laboratory was empathy, as reported by one of the interviewees \textit{``You
87 87 know people in person and it makes such a big difference because it causes
88 88 empathy. You already know who that person is, it's not just a name''}. This
... ... @@ -96,8 +96,8 @@ were presented in our previous work \cite{siqueira2018cd} and corroborate these
96 96 results. To 81.1\% of students and 75\% of senior developers, deploying new
97 97 versions of the SPB portal in production was a motivator during the project.
98 98  
99   -One of the MPOG analyst interviewed also noted these releases also helped to
100   -\textbf{overcome the government bias regarding low productivity of collaborative
  99 +One of the MPOG analysts interviewed also noted these releases also helped to
  100 +\textbf{overcome the government bias regarding the low productivity of collaborative
101 101 projects with academia}: \textit{``At first, the government staff had a bias that
102 102 universities do not deliver. We overcame that bias in the course of the project.
103 103 We deliver a lot and with quality. Today, I think if we had paid the same amount
... ... @@ -135,14 +135,14 @@ gave credibility to the development \textit{``You had the reviewers, who were
135 135 the original developers of the software, that gave you confidence and
136 136 confidence in the code''}.
137 137  
138   -In addition, with these professionals was possible to \textbf{transferred
139   -knowledge of industry and free software to government and academia}. Working
  138 +In addition, with these professionals was possible to \textbf{transfer
  139 +knowledge from industry and open source communities to government and academia}. Working
140 140 with senior developers was important for all interns during the
141 141 project. {91\%} of them also believe that working with professionals was
142 142 important for learning. {75\%} of senior developers believe that 'Working in
143 143 pairs with a senior' and 62.5\% that 'Participate in joint review tasks' were
144 144 the tasks with the involvement of them that most contributed to the evolution
145   -of students in the project. And, in guiding a students, {75\%} believe that
  145 +of students in the project. And, in guiding students, {75\%} believe that
146 146 this knowledge was widespread among the others in the team. This acquisition
147 147 of knowledge was also noted by the government, which stated \textit{``On the side of
148 148 UnB, what we perceived was that the project was very big leap when the
... ... @@ -154,7 +154,7 @@ The fronts also gained more autonomy to manage their activities. The role
154 154 of ``meta-coach'' was defined among the students, to coordinate the interactions
155 155 between teams and coach to coordinate each front. Coaches have become a \textbf{point
156 156 of reference for the development process}. {89.1\%} of students said that the
157   -presence of the coach was essential to the running of sprint, and for {87.5\%}
  157 +presence of the coach was essential to the running of a sprint, and for {87.5\%}
158 158 of senior developers coaches was essential for their interaction with the team.
159 159 MPOG analysts saw coaches as facilitators for their activities and for
160 160 communication with the development team. One of the interviewees said \textit{``I
... ...