REVIEW 1 cited by
I depended on you and you broke me: An empirical study of manifesting breaking changes in client packages
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
I depended on you and you broke me: An empirical study of manifesting breaking changes in client packages
read the original abstract
Complex software systems have a network of dependencies. Developers often configure package managers (e.g., npm) to automatically update dependencies with each publication of new releases containing bug fixes and new features. When a dependency release introduces backward-incompatible changes, commonly known as breaking changes, dependent packages may not build anymore. This may indirectly impact downstream packages, but the impact of breaking changes and how dependent packages recover from these breaking changes remain unclear. To close this gap, we investigated the manifestation of breaking changes in the npm ecosystem, focusing on cases where packages' builds are impacted by breaking changes from their dependencies. We measured the extent to which breaking changes affect dependent packages. Our analyses show that around 12% of the dependent packages and 14% of their releases were impacted by a breaking change during updates of non-major releases of their dependencies. We observed that, from all of the manifesting breaking changes, 44% were introduced both in minor and patch releases, which in principle should be backward compatible. Clients recovered themselves from these breaking changes in half of the cases, most frequently by upgrading or downgrading the provider's version without changing the versioning configuration in the package manager. We expect that these results help developers understand the potential impact of such changes and recover from them.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Specification and Detection of LLM Code Smells
A catalog of five LLM code smells and a static detection tool find that 60.5% of 200 open-source LLM-using Python projects exhibit at least one smell.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.