“This new tool looks great, but who is going to triage the results and open the bugs?”
Many engagements with a static analysis tool often start this way. Sorting through the results to determine which are real, and which are false positives, is a task that someone has to do. That task takes time away from the other activities that person would have been doing anyway and often this perceived workload will kill the idea before it starts. There is another way.
Here is a quick tip to move past the question on who will triage the issues: Automate the triage process. Automatically assign the issues to the most likely person to fix it – the author of the code.
The static analysis tool will provide the defect type and some meta-data about the defect like a severity level. It will also provide the source path, filename, and line of code where the problem was found.
A good heuristic to use in automatically assigning the bugs is the last person to check in a change to that file. In all likelihood, that person created the error. In the teams where I’ve implemented this method, we generally see a 80-90% accuracy for the triage. That is 80-90% of the time, the static analysis tool flagged an issue caused with that check-in.
For the balance, we ask for the developers to investigate the issue anyway. I like to use the analogy of picking up trash while on a walk. You didn’t leave that trash, someone else did. However, by picking it up, you leave the trail a little bit nicer for the next person. Think about fixing legacy bugs like this. If you are working in that file, and you find a bug, go ahead and fix it.
Implementing this process does require a small bit of scripting. First, the script retrieves the list of new issues from your scan (daily, weekly, whatever frequency you run the scans). Then, for each new issue, lookup in the source control system the author that made the last check-in. Next, create a record in the bug tracking system (or update the field in the defect record of your tool – if it has a tracker). Finally, send a notification to the author that they have a new assignment.
This assignment process has been successful for several teams, it might help you. Give it a try. Of course, track the success rate and make any needed adjustments.