← 研踪 PaperTrailarXiv:2605.16133 · v2
The Dangers of Non-Self-Fixed Architecture Technical Debt and Its Impact on Time-to-Fix
首次提交 2026-05-16 00:16
版本更新 2026-11-04 18:15
雷达观测 2026-11-05 11:10
摘要
Technical Debt (TD) refers to the long-term costs incurred when developers prioritize short-term delivery over quality-improving work. Architectural Technical Debt (ATD) arises when architectural decisions (e.g., technology choices, patterns, or decomposition) prioritize near-term progress over future maintainability and evolvability. Because ATD affects a system's core structure and propagates through architectural dependencies, it is often more expensive and disruptive to remediate than localized code-level debt. Although ATD has been widely studied, an important but underexplored aspect of repayment is who performs it. Prior work provides limited empirical evidence on repayment responsibility in ATD and its relationship to time-to-fix. We empirically study self-fixed ATD, where the introducer also repays the debt, and contrast it with non--self-fixed ATD in large Apache open-source projects. We reconstruct ATD lifecycles by tracing Jira artifacts to version-control history to identify introduction and repayment points and attribute developer roles. We address three research questions on the prevalence of self-fixed ATD, time-to-fix differences between self-fixed and non--self-fixed items, and how factors related to code change and collaboration metrics relate to repayment speed. Using descriptive statistics, non-parametric tests, and survival analysis, we show that self-fixed and non--self-fixed ATD exhibit distinct repayment dynamics and differences in how changes are shared on ATD-affected files. In particular, non--self-fixed ATD is more likely to remain unresolved longer when changes are spread across many developers. These results provide actionable guidance for maintainers to identify potentially high-risk ATD items and support knowledge transfer by maintaining introducer involvement when feasible and documenting the design rationale during repayment.
作者备注：This manuscript is currently under review
观测到的版本
相邻记录可能跳过中间版本；首次发现 v2 及以上也会标为版本更新。
v2 · 2026-11-04 18:15 · 最新观测版本
The Dangers of Non-Self-Fixed Architecture Technical Debt and Its Impact on Time-to-Fix
Technical Debt (TD) refers to the long-term costs incurred when developers prioritize short-term delivery over quality-improving work. Architectural Technical Debt (ATD) arises when architectural decisions (e.g., technology choices, patterns, or decomposition) prioritize near-term progress over future maintainability and evolvability. Because ATD affects a system's core structure and propagates through architectural dependencies, it is often more expensive and disruptive to remediate than localized code-level debt. Although ATD has been widely studied, an important but underexplored aspect of repayment is who performs it. Prior work provides limited empirical evidence on repayment responsibility in ATD and its relationship to time-to-fix. We empirically study self-fixed ATD, where the introducer also repays the debt, and contrast it with non--self-fixed ATD in large Apache open-source projects. We reconstruct ATD lifecycles by tracing Jira artifacts to version-control history to identify introduction and repayment points and attribute developer roles. We address three research questions on the prevalence of self-fixed ATD, time-to-fix differences between self-fixed and non--self-fixed items, and how factors related to code change and collaboration metrics relate to repayment speed. Using descriptive statistics, non-parametric tests, and survival analysis, we show that self-fixed and non--self-fixed ATD exhibit distinct repayment dynamics and differences in how changes are shared on ATD-affected files. In particular, non--self-fixed ATD is more likely to remain unresolved longer when changes are spread across many developers. These results provide actionable guidance for maintainers to identify potentially high-risk ATD items and support knowledge transfer by maintaining introducer involvement when feasible and documenting the design rationale during repayment.
查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗