Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This paper investigates the integration of Technical Debt Management (TDM) tools within CI/CD pipelines in open-source projects by analyzing a large dataset of Travis CI configurations and supporting scripts from GitHub. The study identifies the prevalence of different TDM tools and reveals common configuration anti-patterns, such as "Absent Feedback," where the results of TDM analysis are not effectively communicated. The findings highlight the need for improved TDM tools and integration practices within CI/CD workflows to promote sustainable software development.
Most CI/CD pipelines using technical debt management tools rely on external scripts, suggesting a need for more seamless and integrated tool support.
Managing technical debt (TD) is critical to ensure the sustainability of long-term software projects. However, the time and cost involved in technical debt management (TDM) often discourage practitioners from performing this activity consistently. Continuous Integration and Continuous Delivery (CI/CD) pipelines offer an opportunity to support TDM by embedding automated practices directly into the development workflow. Despite this potential, it remains unclear how TDM tools could be integrated into CI/CD pipelines, and we still lack established best practices for this process. To address this problem, the objective of this study is to understand how TDM tools have been used in CI/CD pipelines and also identify potential configuration anti-patterns. To this end, we conducted a large-scale mining software repository (MSR) study on GitHub. In total, we collected around 600,000 Travis CI configuration files and 50,000 supporting scripts, and identified 3,684 pipelines that contain at least one TDM tool. We applied descriptive statistics to analyze the prevalence of tools and anti-patterns, and our findings show that most tools are executed and integrated using an external script; in addition, \textit{Absent Feedback} is the most common configuration anti-pattern. We believe that researchers and practitioners can use the evidence of this study to further investigate how to improve both the tools that are integrated in CI/CD and the integration practices.
