Smart Scholars🛡 Scholar Shield🏛 Research Integrity Desk🧩 Portfolio Console📰 Journals🔧 DOI MembersTools🔎 Journal AuditGI GetIndexedDr DOI Doctor

Cite this DOI

10.46243/jst.2021.v6.i05.pp168-179 · Tools used in Global Software Engineering: A systematic mapping review

APA (7th edition)

Naik, D. R., S. Leelashyam, & M Venkataratnam (2021). Tools used in Global Software Engineering: A systematic mapping review. *Journal of Science & Technology*, *06*(05), 168–179. https://doi.org/10.46243/jst.2021.v6.i05.pp168-179

⬇ text Italics are shown as *asterisks* in plain text — the journal or book title and the volume.

BibTeX

@article{naik2021tools,
  author    = {Naik, D Rajeev and S. Leelashyam and M Venkataratnam},
  title     = {{Tools used in Global Software Engineering: A systematic mapping review}},
  journal   = {Journal of Science \& Technology},
  year      = {2021},
  month     = {oct},
  volume    = {06},
  number    = {05},
  pages     = {168--179},
  publisher = {Longman Publishers},
  issn      = {2456-5660},
  doi       = {10.46243/jst.2021.v6.i05.pp168-179},
  url       = {https://doi.org/10.46243/jst.2021.v6.i05.pp168-179},
  language  = {en},
  abstract  = {Method: We performed a systematic mapping review through a search for studies that answered our research question, ‘‘Which software tools (commercial, free or research based) are available to support Global Software Engineering?’’ Applying a range of related search terms to key electronic databases, selected journals, and conferences and workshops enabled us to extract relevant papers. We then used a data extraction template to classify, extract and record important information about the GSD tools from each paper. This information was synthesized and presented as a general map of types of GSD tools, the tool’s main features and how each tool was validated in practice. Results: The main result is a list of 132 tools, which, according to the literature, have been, or are intended to be, used in global software projects. The classification of these tools includes lists of features for com- munication, coordination and control as well as how the tool has been validated in practice. We found that out the total of 132, the majority of tools were developed at research centers, and only a small per- centage of tools (18.9\%) are reported as having been tested outside the initial context in which they were developed.}
}

⬇ .bib

RIS (EndNote, Zotero, Mendeley)

TY  - JOUR
TI  - Tools used in Global Software Engineering: A systematic mapping review
AU  - Naik, D Rajeev
AU  - S. Leelashyam
AU  - M Venkataratnam
JO  - Journal of Science & Technology
PY  - 2021
DA  - 2021/10/28/
VL  - 06
IS  - 05
SP  - 168
EP  - 179
PB  - Longman Publishers
SN  - 2456-5660
LA  - en
AB  - Method: We performed a systematic mapping review through a search for studies that answered our research question, ‘‘Which software tools (commercial, free or research based) are available to support Global Software Engineering?’’ Applying a range of related search terms to key electronic databases, selected journals, and conferences and workshops enabled us to extract relevant papers. We then used a data extraction template to classify, extract and record important information about the GSD tools from each paper. This information was synthesized and presented as a general map of types of GSD tools, the tool’s main features and how each tool was validated in practice. Results: The main result is a list of 132 tools, which, according to the literature, have been, or are intended to be, used in global software projects. The classification of these tools includes lists of features for com- munication, coordination and control as well as how the tool has been validated in practice. We found that out the total of 132, the majority of tools were developed at research centers, and only a small per- centage of tools (18.9%) are reported as having been tested outside the initial context in which they were developed.
DO  - 10.46243/jst.2021.v6.i05.pp168-179
UR  - https://doi.org/10.46243/jst.2021.v6.i05.pp168-179
ER  -

⬇ .ris

CSL-JSON

{
    "type": "article-journal",
    "id": "10.46243/jst.2021.v6.i05.pp168-179",
    "DOI": "10.46243/jst.2021.v6.i05.pp168-179",
    "URL": "https://doi.org/10.46243/jst.2021.v6.i05.pp168-179",
    "title": "Tools used in Global Software Engineering: A systematic mapping review",
    "source": "Smart Scholars DOI Registry",
    "container-title": "Journal of Science & Technology",
    "author": [
        {
            "family": "Naik",
            "given": "D Rajeev"
        },
        {
            "family": "S. Leelashyam"
        },
        {
            "family": "M Venkataratnam"
        }
    ],
    "issued": {
        "date-parts": [
            [
                2021,
                10,
                28
            ]
        ]
    },
    "volume": "06",
    "issue": "05",
    "page": "168-179",
    "publisher": "Longman Publishers",
    "language": "en",
    "abstract": "Method: We performed a systematic mapping review through a search for studies that answered our research question, ‘‘Which software tools (commercial, free or research based) are available to support Global Software Engineering?’’ Applying a range of related search terms to key electronic databases, selected journals, and conferences and workshops enabled us to extract relevant papers. We then used a data extraction template to classify, extract and record important information about the GSD tools from each paper. This information was synthesized and presented as a general map of types of GSD tools, the tool’s main features and how each tool was validated in practice. Results: The main result is a list of 132 tools, which, according to the literature, have been, or are intended to be, used in global software projects. The classification of these tools includes lists of features for com- munication, coordination and control as well as how the tool has been validated in practice. We found that out the total of 132, the majority of tools were developed at research centers, and only a small per- centage of tools (18.9%) are reported as having been tested outside the initial context in which they were developed.",
    "ISSN": "2456-5660"
}

⬇ .json What citeproc and reference managers read; the DOI system hands it out for Accept: application/vnd.citationstyles.csl+json, and so does this registry's resolver.

From the record as registered (version 2) — the record and its history. Programs: https://registry.smartscholars.in/api.php?action=cite&doi=10.46243%2Fjst.2021.v6.i05.pp168-179 gives all four in one JSON answer.

Everything Smart Scholars runsNine sites, one account. A journal starts at the audit; an author starts at Scholar Shield.

For journals & publishers

Start with the audit — it is free, and it is the gate to everything else.

DOI care

Nine services on one journal profile — each previews first and acts only on your approval.

For authors & researchers

Free to use. Nothing you check is shared with the journal.

For institutions, sponsors & DOI operators

Smart Scholars

Mon–Sat, 10:00–19:00 IST. The Ask AI button on every page answers about our services at any hour.

News

Policies

What we can register a DOI for

20 kinds of record, one account, one place. Every one gets a DOI that resolves, metadata that indexes read, and a record that stays correct afterwards.
Journals
  • Journal articles
  • Journal titles
  • Pending publications
  • Peer reviews
  • Preprints & posted content
Books & conferences
  • Books
  • Book chapters
  • Book series
  • Book sets
  • Conference proceedings
  • Proceedings series
  • Conference papers
Other research output
  • Theses & dissertations
  • Reports & working papers
  • Report series
  • Standards
  • Databases
  • Datasets
  • Figures, tables & supplements
Funding
  • Grants & funding awards

Elsewhere

The same company, in the places our publishers already read.
Smart Scholars · Every service on one pageData from OpenAlex (openalex.org), CC0 · Crossref · ISSN Portal · DOAJContact
WhatsApp