{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.012633624878522837, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 4.988372093023256, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Automating bug report assignment

Open-source development projects typically support an open bug repository to which both developers and users can report bugs. A report that appears in this repository must be triaged to determine if the report is one which requires attention and if it is, which developer will be assigned the responsibility of resolving the report. Large open-source developments are burdened by the rate at which new bug reports appear in the bug repository. The thesis of this work is that the task of triage can be eased by using a semi-automated approach to assign bug reports to developers. The approach consists of constructing a recommender for bug assignments; examined are both a range of algorithms that can be used and the various kinds of information provided to the algorithms. The proposed work seeks to determine through human experimentation a sufficient level of precision for the recommendations, and to analytically determine the trade-offs of the various algorithmic and information choices.