The prevalence of devices for programming quality examination has expanded throughout the years, with uncommon regard for instruments that ascertain Technical debt dependent on infringement of a lot of rules. SonarQube is one of the most utilized devices and gives an estimation of the time expected to remediate technical debt. Notwithstanding, experts are as yet suspicious about the precision of their remediation time estimation. In this paper, we investigate the exactness of programming on a set open-source Java ventures. The outcomes call attention to that Technical debt remediation time, contrasted with the genuine time for paying off technical debt, is for the most part overestimated, and that the most precise estimation identifies with code smells, while the least exact concerns bugs.

SonarQube, Technical debt, Security, Code Quality, Open Source Software

[1] Allman, Eric. “Managing Technical Debt.” Communications of the ACM 55(5): 50–55. Evolution and Process 29(10), 2012.
[2] Nyyti Saarimäki, Valentina Lenarduzzi, and Davide Taibi. 2019. The Github Repository of the Technical Debt Dataset. https://github.com/clowee/ The-Technical-Debt-Dataset/
[3] Counsell, S. et al. “Is a Strategy for Code Smell Assessment Long Overdue?” In Proceedings - International Conference on Software Engineering, 32–38, 2010.
[4] Freezer, Erik. "Measuring Usability?: Are Effectiveness, Efficiency, and Satisfaction Really Correlated??" IEEE Access 2(1): 345–52, 2006.
[5] Gat, Israel, and John D. Heintz. “From Assessment to Reduction: How Cutter Consortium Helps Rein in Millions of Dollars in Technical Debt.” In Proceedings - International Conference on Software Engineering, 24–26, 2011.
[6] Griffith, Isaac, Hanane Taffahi, Clemente Izurieta, and David Claudio. “A Simulation Study of Practical Methods for Technical Debt Management in Agile Software Development.” In Proceedings - Winter Simulation Conference, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc., 1014–25, 2015.
[7] A. Zeller J. Sliwerski, T. Zimmermann. When Do Changes Induce Fixes? International Workshop on Mining Software Repositories, 1–5, 2005.
[8] Guo, Yue, and Carolyn Seaman. "A Portfolio Approach to Technical Debt Management." In Proceedings - International Conference on Software Engineering, 31–34, 2011.
[9] Holvitie, Johannes et al. “Technical Debt and Agile Software Development Practices and Processes: An Industry Practitioner Survey.” Information and Software Technology 96: 141–60, 2018.
[10] Kellner, Marc I., Raymond J. Madachy, and David M. Raffo. “Software Process Simulation Modeling: Why? What? How?” Journal of Systems and Software 46(2): 91–105. Kuusinen, Kati et al. 2017. “Decomposition of US.” 283: 135–50, 1999.
[11] Murray, Niall et al. “Modeling User Quality of Experience of Olfaction-Enhanced Multimedia.” IEEE Access: 1–13, 2018.
[12] Nugroho, Ariadi, Joost Visser, and Tobias Kuipers. “An Empirical Model of Technical Debt and Interest.” In Proceedings - International Conference on Software Engineering, , 1–8, 2011.
[13] Oliveira, Frederico, Alfredo Goldman, and Viviane Santos. “Managing Technical Debt in Software Projects Using Scrum: An Action Research.” In Proceedings - 2015 Agile Conference, Agile 2015, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc., 50–59, 2015.
[14] Ryan, Sharon, and Rory V O Connor. “The Journal of Systems and Software Development of a Team Measure for Tacit Knowledge in Software Development Teams.” The Journal of Systems & Software 82(2): 229–40, 2009.
[15] M. Z. Khan, A. Alsaeedi, and M. Huda, “Empirically Validated Software Efficiency Estimation Model: Product Operation Perspective,” J. Softw. Eng. Appl., vol. 11, no. 10, pp. 486–499, 2018.
[16] Dos Santos, Eduardo Witter, and Ingrid Nunes. “Investigating the Effectiveness of Peer Code Review in Distributed Software Development.” ACM International Conference Proceeding Series: 84–93, 2017.
[17] Dos Santos, Paulo Sérgio Medeiros, Amanda Varella, Cristine Ribeiro Dantas, and Daniel Beltrão Borges. “Visualizing and Managing Technical Debt in Agile Development: An Experience Report.” In Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, Springer Verlag, 121–34, 2013.
[18] Seaman, Carolyn, and Yuepu Guo. 2011. 82 Advances in Computers Measuring and Monitoring Technical Debt.
[19] D. I. Heimann, “IEEE Standard 730-2014 Software Quality Assurance Processes Learning objectives What is IEEE 730??,” pp. 1–26, 2015.
[20] Stopford, Ben, Ken Wallace, and John Allspaw. “Technical Debt: Challenges and Perspectives.” IEEE Software 34(4): 79–81, 2017.
[21] M. A. Akbar et al., “Improving the quality of software development process by introducing a new methodology-Az-model,” IEEE Access, vol. 6, no. February, pp. 4811–4823, 2017.
[22] Zazworka, Nico et al. “A Case Study on Effectively Identifying Technical Debt.” In ACM International Conference Proceeding Series, , 42–47, 2013.
[23] A. Rahman, F. H. Sunny, H. M. Mishu, and F. Sumi, “Open Access Software Testing Algorithm Units,” no. 1, pp. 271–275, 2017.
[24] M. Z. Khan, A. Alsaeedi, and M. Huda, “Empirically Validated Software Efficiency Estimation Model: Product Operation Perspective,” J. Softw. Eng. Appl., vol. 11, no. 10, pp. 486–499, 2018.