softwareengineeringtooldemos / paper Goto Github PK

Hi @CaptainEmerson, was this paper ever published anywhere?

Adding this point thinking that this may make the case for the paper stronger.

Some tools are not well maintained and have version dependencies. Many times not well documented as well. This gives rise to groups such as below. Lack of documentation increases dependencies on people leading to communication overheads as well.

Request you to browse through the conversation in this link:

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/java-pathfinder/nvGJ3qb9bK0/xv0TA5XXBgAJ

Have a look at the below response.
Steven Lauterburg
11/18/15

jpf-actor does not work with the latest version of jpf-core (one of these days I will have to rectify that). You can, however, access a snapshot of an older jpf-core version that it will work with at http://babelfish.arc.nasa.gov/trac/jpf/wiki/projects/jpf-core . Scroll to the bottom of the screen and expand the attachments tab. jpf-actor will work with jpf-core-r1038-src.zip

-Steve Lauterburg

• show quoted text -

Dear @SoftwareEngineeringToolDemos/students:

The paper is making good progress, and we'll either submit to ICSE or TSE soon. But there's one hiccup; the ACM (who cosponsors ICSE) has specific guidelines for what you have to do to be an author:

Anyone listed as Author on an ACM paper must meet all the following criteria:

• they have made substantial intellectual contributions to some components of the original work described in the paper; and
• they have participated in drafting and/or revision of the paper; and
• they are aware that the paper has been submitted for publication; and
• they agree to be held accountable for any issues relating to correctness or integrity of the work.

For y'all, the first one is already done. The 3rd and 4th are okay too -- we talked about these in class. But as for the second one, it's just been me writing the paper.

Consequently, in order to remain on the author list, you must help edit the paper. Here are some ideas:

• Read it over and make some minor edits (in the .tex file). There are lots of opportunities right now; I haven't even spell checked it yet. Don't be concerned about breaking things; I'll review all your changes.
• Make a more substantial change, like clarifying some of the ideas. Feel free to submit more substantial changes as pull requests.
• Take on some issues in the issue tracker. Right now there's just one, but I'll add more if you ask.
• If you're good with R, the figures need some adjustments. Talk to me and I'll explain how.
• Ask me a point of clarification via a comment (latex line comments start with %)
• File an issue for me address in the paper
• Other contributions are welcome, too.

Please make a contribution to drafting the paper by August 16th. The sooner you do it, the most easy changes are still available. 😄 Anyone who does not make a contribution by then will be moved to the Acknowledgments section. Feel free to comment below if you have any questions.

Right now, it's in a \thanks command (with a discouraged \IEEEoverridecommandlockouts command). Instead, authors should be more like this:

\author{\IEEEauthorblockN{Emerson Murphy-Hill, Shabbir Abdul, Varun Aettapu} %add all authors here!
\IEEEauthorblockA{Department of Computer Science\\
North Carolina State University\\
Raleigh, North Carolina, USA\\
[email protected],\{sabdul,vaettap]}@ncsu.edu}%add all emails here!

This isn't a hard change to make, but it'll take a few minutes to do manually.

@SoftwareEngineeringToolDemos/students

You'll see in this repo I've started a paper, with everyone's name as an author! (Yes, not all 75 of us can be on the first page. But you all are authors nonetheless!)

Take a look at your name in the "additional authors" section, and see if you want any corrections. Feel free to modify the .tex file directly and push, or submit a pull request if you're feeling sheepish.

http://reproducibility.cs.arizona.edu/v2/RepeatabilityTR.pdf