Software dependency management

Information

  • Patent Grant
  • 11714629
  • Patent Number
    11,714,629
  • Date Filed
    Thursday, November 19, 2020
    4 years ago
  • Date Issued
    Tuesday, August 1, 2023
    a year ago
  • Inventors
    • Shaastry; Santosh
    • Gurusiddappa; Narendra Prabhu
    • Srinivasan; Gunaalan
    • Renavikar; Neel Millind
  • Original Assignees
  • Examiners
    • Nguyen; Duy Khuong T
    Agents
    • Kokka & Backus, PC
Abstract
Techniques for software dependency management are described, including receiving a query at a repository configured to store a file identifying a dependency between an application and an update, the query being configured to request retrieval and implementation of the update with the application, parsing the query to identify the update and a version of the update configured to modify the application, generating a ranking associated with the update and the version using output from a machine-learning module configured to be trained against data associated with a community, and other data associated with analyzing an issue associated with the update or the version, providing a response to the query, receiving another query requesting the update or the version, retrieving the update and the version, and implementing the update or the version, the update or the version being implemented in response to the another query.
Description
FIELD

The present invention relates generally to computer science, data science, and data analytics. More specifically, techniques for software dependency management are described.


BACKGROUND

In software development where various software modules, programs, or applications are often designed, configured, and implemented to work compatibly, there is a significant and substantial problem, often referred to as “dependency hell.” This is a colloquial term often used to describe costly and time-consuming activities that software developers, programmers, engineers, and architects spend finding, identifying, correcting, and fixing updates to interrelationships often found in source code between different programs that rely upon each other to properly run (i.e., execute). These are typically referred to as “dependencies” and frequently require updating even after an initial dependency has been addressed.


Conventionally, software (regardless of whether local, remote, or distributed (e.g., cloud-based)) uses or relies upon other software to function, thus creating a dependency. When updating dependencies in source code, conventionally, application programming interfaces or other software are used to transfer data in a compatible fashion to permit interoperability. Software developers, programmers, engineers, and architects (hereafter “developers”) typically manually locate updates, review data and information about prior uses of the updates (including community developer/user information or feedback), install/implement updates, and, frequently, fix or replace updates that are incompatible (i.e., erroneous).


Conventional solutions often require extensive manual work performed by a software developer to identify and configure these dependencies, which is both time consuming and expensive, but also slows application development. Dependencies are critical and vital to the design, architecture, and operation of simple and complex software that often use other elements or components such as those found in networked or cloud-based programs, applications, or platforms, many of which require specific versions in order to achieve compatibility, integrity, and operability. However, checking for dependencies and ensuring that desired versions are properly installed can, as mentioned above, be an expensive and time consuming effort leading to increased development costs, expense, and delay, which can be detrimental or harmful to end users and consumers that are increasingly using networked applications and platforms to fulfill important, if not vital, individual and organizational needs. Conventional solutions and approaches to manually updating software dependencies typically result in lost productivity, which dramatically slows design, build, and run-time cycles for software product releases. Conventional solutions lead to increased user and organizational costs and longer development cycles, which consequently hinder innovation, adoption, and successful commercialization.


Thus, what is needed is a solution for managing software dependencies, without the limitations of conventional techniques.





BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

Various embodiments or examples (“examples”) are disclosed in the following detailed description and the accompanying drawings:



FIG. 1 illustrates an exemplary system for software dependency management;



FIG. 2 illustrates an exemplary application architecture for software dependency management;



FIG. 3 illustrates an exemplary data flow process for software dependency management;



FIG. 4 illustrates an exemplary process for software dependency management;



FIG. 5 illustrates another exemplary process for software dependency management;



FIG. 6 illustrates an exemplary self-learning loop process for software dependency management;



FIG. 7 illustrates an exemplary ranking process for software dependency management;



FIG. 8A illustrates an exemplary smart pull process for software dependency management;



FIG. 8B illustrates an exemplary continuing smart pull process for software dependency management; and



FIG. 9 illustrates an exemplary computing system suitable for software dependency management.





DETAILED DESCRIPTION

Various embodiments or examples may be implemented in numerous ways, including as a system, a process, an apparatus, a user interface, or a series of program code or instructions on a computer readable medium such as a storage medium or a computer network including program instructions that are sent over optical, electronic, electrical, chemical, wired, or wireless communication links. In general, individual operations or sub-operations of disclosed processes may be performed in an arbitrary order, unless otherwise provided in the claims.


A detailed description of one or more examples is provided below along with accompanying figures. This detailed description is provided in connection with various examples, but is not limited to any particular example. The scope is limited only by the claims and numerous alternatives, modifications, and equivalents. Numerous specific details are set forth in the following description in order to provide a thorough understanding. These details are provided for the purpose of illustrating various examples and the described techniques may be practiced according to the claims without some or all of these specific details. For clarity, technical material that is known in the technical fields and related to the examples has not been described in detail to avoid unnecessarily obscuring the description or providing unnecessary details that may be already known to those of ordinary skill in the art.


As used herein, “system” may refer to or include the description of a computer, network, or distributed computing system, topology, or architecture using various computing resources that are configured to provide computing features, functions, processes, elements, components, or parts, without any particular limitation as to the type, make, manufacturer, developer, provider, configuration, programming or formatting language (e.g., JAVA®, JAVASCRIPT®, and others, without limitation or restriction), service, class, resource, specification, protocol, or other computing or network attributes. As used herein, “software” or “application” may also be used interchangeably or synonymously with, or refer to a computer program, software, program, firmware, or any other term that may be used to describe, reference, or refer to a logical set of instructions that, when executed, performs a function or set of functions within a computing system or machine, regardless of whether physical, logical, or virtual and without restriction or limitation to any particular implementation, design, configuration, instance, or state. Further, “platform” may refer to any type of computer hardware (hereafter “hardware”) and/or software using one or more local, remote, distributed, networked, or computing cloud (hereafter “cloud”)-based computing resources (e.g., computers, clients, servers, tablets, notebooks, smart phones, cell phones, mobile computing platforms or tablets, and the like) to provide an application, operating system, or other computing environment, such as those described herein, without restriction or limitation to any particular implementation, design, configuration, instance, or state. Distributed resources such as cloud computing networks (also referred to interchangeably as “computing clouds,” “storage clouds,” “cloud networks,” or, simply, “clouds,” without restriction or limitation to any particular implementation, design, configuration, instance, or state) may be used for processing and/or storage of varying quantities, types, structures, and formats of data, without restriction or limitation to any particular implementation, design, or configuration. In the drawings provided herewith, the relative sizes and shapes do not convey any limitations, restrictions, requirements, or dimensional constraints unless otherwise specified in the description and are provided for purposes of illustration only to display processes, data, data flow chart, application or program architecture or other symbols, as described in this Specification.


As described herein, structured and unstructured data may be stored in various types of data structures including, but not limited to databases, data repositories, data warehouses, data stores, or other data structures and facilities configured to manage, store, retrieve, process calls for/to, copy, modify, or delete data or sets of data (i.e., “datasets”) in various computer programming languages and formats in accordance with various types of structured and unstructured database schemas and languages such as SQL®, MySQL®, NoSQL™, DynamoDB™, R, or others, such as those developed by proprietary and open source providers like Amazon® Web Services, Inc. of Seattle, Wash., Microsoft®, Oracle®, Salesforce.com, Inc., and others, without limitation or restriction to any particular schema, instance, or implementation. Further, references to databases, data structures, or any type of data storage facility may include any embodiment as a local, remote, distributed, networked, cloud-based, or combined implementation thereof, without limitation or restriction. In some examples, data may be formatted and transmitted (i.e., transferred over one or more data communication protocols) between computing resources using various types of wired and wireless data communication and transfer protocols such as Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP), Transmission Control Protocol (TCP)/Internet Protocol (IP), Internet Relay Chat (IRC), SMS, text messaging, instant messaging (IM), WiFi, WiMax, or others, without limitation. Further, as described herein, disclosed processes implemented as software may be programmed using JAVA®, JAVASCRIPT®, Scala, Perl, Python™ XML, HTML, and other data formats and programming languages, without limitation. As used herein, references to layers of an application architecture (e.g., application layer or data layer) may refer to a stacked layer application architecture designed and configured using models such as the Open Systems Interconnect (OSI) model or others.


In some examples, various examples of process and apparatus-based implementations include techniques for identifying, managing, and automatically configuring dependencies, regardless of type (e.g., chained, serial, or others), in source code, without limitations or restrictions due to various types of structures, formats, or programming languages, including platforms, applications, interfaces (e.g., Application Programming Interfaces (i.e., “API”s), and the like, regardless of application layer or other parameters. In some examples, the techniques may be implemented as a tool used in software development, hosted on one or more local or networked computing devices such a server, group of servers, group of logical computing resources (regardless of physical locale or geographic distribution if individual resources (e.g., servers, computers, or the like), and as single or multiple-instances using one or more processors, servers, or machines (i.e., physical or virtual) without regard to being single or multi-threaded (i.e., to permit multiple parallel instances to run/execute at substantially similar times). As used herein, described techniques may also be implemented using a local instance/implementation or a distributed topology, such as a distributed data network using resources in data connection with each other, directly or indirectly, over a network such as a computing cloud or cloud-based data network (hereafter referred to as a “cloud”).


The described techniques may be implemented as a software-based application used to manage, address, resolve, upgrade, or update (hereafter “update”) dependencies found in source code. In some examples, the described techniques may be used as a software development “tool” to check (i.e., manually, semi-automatically, or automatically) source code (e.g., program, platform, or application code, before or after compilation) to identify and update dependencies. For example, the described techniques may be used to check for source code dependencies between different software source code found in modules, applications, programs, platforms, or the like. As another example, the described techniques may be designed, configured, and implemented to automatically upgrade software versions of dependencies in order to achieve compatibility between different software (i.e., some software dependencies may be more compatible (i.e., having fewer or no errors after updating dependencies and compiling source code)). The described techniques may also include the use of computing logic, rules, machine learning (e.g., deep learning), and/or other algorithms configured to analyze, evaluate, learn, train, or otherwise process dependency information that is identified in source code (i.e., regardless of computing or programming language, formats, data schemas, data communication and/or transfer protocols or the like).


In some examples, dependencies can be automatically and rapidly addressed, often using suggested or recommended applications, programs, or source code that have compatible dependencies as identified by built-in logic implementing, in some examples, machine and/or deep learning algorithms.


In other examples, a software-based dependency management tool may be configured to automatically upgrade a compatible version of a dependency if, once identified, a newer or preferred version of an update is determined based on machine-learning algorithms that have been trained to identify such against prior updates. In other words, prior installed versions found to be compatible (i.e., having few or no errors when source code with updated dependencies (hereafter “updated source code) has been compiled and/or run)) may be automatically identified, retrieved, and implemented based on attributes such as compatibility. In other examples, data, metadata, and other information associated with a given implementation may be identified as attributes and stored in a data source (e.g., data repository, database, data warehouse, or any other type of data storage facility) for use in training one or more machine learning (e.g., deep learning, supervised, unsupervised, or others, without limitation or restriction) algorithms and, when (subsequent) queries are received for a similar dependency. In some examples, machine or deep learning algorithms such as those used in artificial intelligence may be used. While there is no particular dependency to a given or single machine or deep learning algorithms, there is likewise no requirement that only a single algorithm be used to implement a dependency management tool. Further, there are no restrictions or limitation as to the type of machine learning and/or deep learning algorithms used to process dependency information. As an example, machine-learning algorithms may be trained to analyze attributes of prior implementations of updates to dependencies. When a request to update a dependency is received, a machine-learning algorithm(s) as part of a self-learning loop (or module thereof) can be structured and configured to parse and evaluate a query to identify attributes for a requested update and search for matching attributes (determined from prior updates) in order to present and rank update options for a given dependency.


In other examples, the described techniques may also include processes for identifying incompatibilities between updates for dependencies. Incompatibilities may be due to errors resulting from prior updates (i.e., implementations of updates to dependencies), incompatible programming languages or formats, incongruous or incompatible data types, formats, structures, or the like, and other errors determined (i.e., identified as a result of computing operations performed to analyze data, metadata, attributes, information, or the like) from implementations of updates to software dependencies (hereafter “dependencies”). When errors are detected, various types of messages may be displayed. For example, various types of display statuses (including, but not limited to error messages) may be presented on a user interface such as “no change,” “auto updated,” “partial update,” “partially updated,” “needs attention,” or others, without limitation or restriction. As another example, historical data from prior updates may be used as a data input to an instance of the described techniques as a software-based tool used to manually, semi-automatically (i.e., limited user intervention or input), or automatically manage, fix, or update (hereafter “update”) dependencies between source code for different computer programs, applications, modules, or platforms (hereafter “code”).


Other techniques described may be directed to “smart pull” workflow software modules that are structured (e.g., programmed) to find, retrieve, and implement updates determined based on prior pull requests, but doing so based on identifying, comparing, and matching attributes between current and prior pull requests, in order to automatically implement (i.e., include or write to code updates that address dependencies) that are determined by one or more machine-learning algorithms (trained against data of prior pull requests) to be compatible (e.g., error-free or having an error rate or number of errors below a given quantitative threshold determined by a self-learning loop module or by user input). The described techniques improve productivity (i.e., by reducing the amount of developer time spent manually identifying updates to correct dependencies by trial-and-error and without recourse for addressing incompatibilities apart from manually searching for updates) by increasing predictability, compatibility, and faster resolution of incompatible dependencies, using trained machine learning computing facilities (e.g., modules, algorithms, and the like).


In other examples, updates may be ranked by a ranking module that evaluates input data and attributes from dependency updates (i.e., “updates”). As used herein, “update” may refer to any code (e.g., source, object, or otherwise) that is used to configured, change, or modify other code and, in some examples, may have different versions, one, some, or all of which may be requested, retrieved, and implemented using the techniques described herein. In some examples, update rankings may be generated or modified by user input received at an interface (e.g., rules, thresholds, limits, restrictions, fields, attributes, or the like). In other examples, updates identified by data stored in a data source (e.g., a repository) may be identified upon receipt of a query or request for a given dependency and presented (i.e., displayed) in a user interface as ranked options for updating the dependency. In some examples, the flow of data between a machine-learning module, ranking module, a data source, and a user interface (i.e., receiving input data from a repository and providing user input to the data management tool) may be described as a self-learning loop, which may be implemented as a standalone or distributed (e.g., cloud or network-based) instance using one or more computing and networking resources. Further, a ranking module, as an element (i.e., component) of a software dependency management tool (hereafter “tool”) be implemented using one or more algorithms, one or more of which may also be implemented using machine or deep learning algorithms.


In some examples, a tool using the techniques described herein can also identify and determine specific versions or builds of a given program with a compatible dependency to a software application, platform, or other instance of source code under development. If more recent versions of a given dependency (i.e., program, application, platform, or the like) is available, the techniques described herein may be implemented with a feature or functionality that can make a recommendation or suggestion (i.e., of software code that has a compatible dependency) to conform or fix code dependencies with source code under development. Ultimately, the described techniques are intended to evaluate compatibility of dependencies between different code (e.g., one computer program being dependent on another computer program) and consequently updating dependencies using self-learning loop logic such as that described herein. Regardless, the described techniques are not limited in implementation, design, function, operation, structure, configuration, specification, or other aspects and may be varied without limitation.



FIG. 1 illustrates an exemplary system for software dependency management. Here, system 100 includes application 102, dependency management module 104, application programming interface (hereafter “API”) module 106, source code/data source 108, self-learning data repository 110, dependency data repository 112, update/dependency source 114, dependency data 116, network 118, update/dependency source 120, dependency data 122, and platforms 124-128. In some examples, application 102 may be designed, configured, modified, and/or used to identify and update (i.e., retrieve and install program code (e.g., source, object, or the like) for a dependency. As used herein, a “software dependency” or “dependency” may be an instance in which an application that incorporates, integrates, or uses (hereafter “uses”) another program to run (i.e., compile and/or execute) and function without error or below a given threshold for errors (i.e., at an acceptable error rate) also uses a type of application (e.g., software program, computer program, program, or the like) to implement, upgrade (i.e., to a different version or build), or update (hereafter “update”) the update to ensure interoperability (e.g., using code to ensure correct calls, instances, APIs, or other interconnecting software is installed in a program), consistency, continuity, and operability of the application undergoing software development.


For example, application 102, when run, may be configured to invoke dependency management module 104 to identify and update dependencies in source code (i.e., copies of which may be stored in source code repository 108) using dependency(s) retrieved from update/dependency source 114 or 120. When an update is performed, in some example, data, metadata, attributes, and information associated with the update (i.e., implementation) may be stored in dependency data 112. As shown, source code undergoing software development may be stored in a repository such as source code 108 or in a network or cloud-based repository (e.g., data storage facility, warehouse, database, or other type of repository, without limitation or restriction, including using database management systems (not shown)). In some examples, application 102 may be invoked manually (i.e., by a software developer, engineer, or other user using a graphical user interface configured to receive an input or instruction (not shown)), semi-automatically, or automatically (e.g., rules-initiated, machine or deep learning algorithmically-initiated, or others, without limitation or restriction) to identify and update dependencies between source code 108 of a given program undergoing development and another program, application, platform, or the like.


Here, application 102 may be implemented as an application, component, module, element of platform 124. In some examples, application 102 may be configured as a standalone application or tool used to identify and update software dependencies, for example, in platforms 124-128, which may be in direct (e.g., local) or indirect (e.g., using a data network or cloud such as network 118) data communication. Platforms 124-128 are shown outlined in broken line to illustrate these may be alternative implementations of operating or computing environments in which the described techniques may be implemented (e.g., application 102). In other examples, application 102 and the processes, functions, and structures described herein may be implemented differently.


In some examples, application 102 may be invoked (e.g., receive a command to run, invoke an instance, execute, or otherwise cause to operate) to identify and update dependencies within a software development project (e.g., source code 108 or other source code being written, compiled, edited, built, or other operations). As part of a software development environment or platform (e.g., platform 124-128), application 102, when invoked, may send a message, using any type of database language or format (regardless of whether a message includes an instruction to store, add, retrieve, delete, or modify structured or unstructured data) from dependency management module 104 to dependency data 112. Further, dependency management module 104 may also query self-learning loop data repository 110, which may, in some examples, invoke further modules such as machine or data learning algorithms, rules, logic, or other modules that generate data and/or signals that provide additional information that may be used by dependency management module 104 to identify, select, rank, prioritize, or perform other data operations on source code 108. Upon identifying dependencies in source code 108, dependency management module 104 may send another message, query, request, or the like (via a data communication link or module such as API module 106) to update/dependency source 114 or 120 in order to retrieve source, object, or other program code to implement with source code 108. In some examples, dependency management module 104 may also send data and information via API module 106 to a user interface (not shown) providing available updates to be selected as a ranking, list, or other presentation format, without limitation or restriction. A user, in some examples, may then select an update(s) from update/dependency source 114 and/or 120 by generating and sending (e.g., transmitting) a data response or reply (hereafter “response”) to dependency management module 104 identifying updates to be selected and implemented.


As described in greater detail below, updates to be presented may be ranked, listed, or otherwise presented in various types of display and presentation formats. Further, dependency management module 104 may include self-learning algorithms (e.g., machine or deep learning algorithms, neural networks, or other logic, without limitation or restriction to any particular programming language, format, schema, architecture, or types (e.g., supervised or unsupervised learning algorithms run against open, closed, or proprietary data, regression, classification, clustering, association, anomaly detection, pattern-based, or others, without limitation or restriction). In some examples, “self-learning” may also refer to any type of algorithm(s) used to implement, herein, a self-learning data processing loop module (hereafter “self-learning loop module” or “self-learning loop,” which may be used interchangeably without limitation or restriction) that invokes or calls (e.g., remotely or locally) machine or deep learning algorithms such as those mentioned herein and, over a given period of time, generates results that increase or improve when performing computing tasks. Quantitative determination of increased or improved performance may be measured against a given variable or set of variables that, when measured, are used to determine a level, score, threshold, benchmark, or other quantitative determinator of “performance improvement.”


Referring back to FIG. 1, once updates have been retrieved from update/dependency sources 114 and/or 120 from dependency data repositories 116 or 122, respectively, the retrieved code for the selected or identified dependencies (e.g., as determined by dependency management module 104 and selected automatically or by user input received from, for example, API module 106) may be implemented with source code 108. Update/dependency source 120 and dependency data 122 are shown as an example of an update source that may be in indirect data communication with application 102 and platform 124. Likewise, platform 118 may also be in indirect data communication with application 102 and platform 124 using, for example, a data network, computing cloud (i.e., “cloud”), local area network (LAN), wide area network (WAN), or any other data network, regardless of type, topology, data communication protocol (e.g., HTTP, TCP/IP, HTTPS, and others, without limitation or restriction). Although some modules are shown optionally implemented as a component or module of platform 124 in the described example, in other examples, one or more modules may be implemented as separate, local, remote, standalone, offsite/off-premises, or other installations that are not integrated or otherwise directly coupled to application 102. In other words, application 102 and dependency management 104 may be in data communication with one or more of source code repository 108, self-learning loop data 110, or dependency data repository 112 as remote elements, modules, repositories, applications, platforms, or systems, without limitation or restriction. For example, source code repository 108 may be an open source or public code repository such as GitHub®, acquired by Microsoft Corporation of Redmond, Wash. In still other examples, the size, shape, quantity, type, configuration, function, or structure of the elements in the exemplary system shown may be varied, without limitation or restriction.



FIG. 2 illustrates an exemplary application architecture for software dependency management. Here, application 202 (which, in some examples, may be analogous in function and/or structure to application 102 (FIG. 1)) includes logic 204, deep learning module 206, machine learning module 208, dependency analysis engine 210, smart pull engine 212, display/interface module 214, update/version/compatibility determinator 216, ranking module 218, self-learning loop module 220, rules module 222, communication/API Module 224, repositories 226-230, network 232, data bus 234, and data link 236. In some examples, one or more of elements 204-224 of application 202 may transfer data, exchange signals, or otherwise be in data communication with other elements 204-224 (including repository 228 and, over network 232, repository 230). In other examples, data may be unidirectional, bidirectional, serial, parallel, or transferred using one or more data communication protocols without limitation or restriction to any particular type or instance.


As shown, application 202 may be implemented similarly in function, structure, and/or configuration to application 102 (FIG. 1) to identify and update dependencies found in software projects undergoing development. Here, logic 204 may be software or firmware implemented as a module, application, applet, script, program, or the like to generate and transfer control data and signals over data bus 234 to (internal) elements 206-226 or data communication link 236 to external elements 228-232. As show, logic 204 may be an operating system, set of rules, group of algorithms (or a single algorithm) that send data and/or signals to elements 206-226 to manage and control the identification, retrieval, and implementation of updates to source code undergoing software development (hereafter “development”). Different types of algorithms may be used to provide various functions to application 102 such as deep learning module 206, machine learning module 208, ranking module 218, and self-learning loop module 220 (described in greater detail below). As described above, various types of machine and deep learning algorithms may be used and are not limited in type, configuration, or quantity, but may be varied to implement the described techniques.


Here, dependency analysis engine 210 may be configured to evaluate a project (e.g., source code, object code, or other program code undergoing development (i.e., software development)) to identify dependencies between source code undergoing development and other software. For example, dependency analysis engine 210 may be structured as a separate, standalone application that is configured to identify dependencies by analyzing data passed through communication/API module 224, the latter of which was used in prior updates for similar or substantially similar dependencies. In some examples, dependency analysis engine 210 may also be configured to evaluate a source code project (hereafter “source code” and “project” may be used interchangeably, without limitation or restriction for all purposes within this Detailed Description) to identify dependencies and data associated with prior updates performed to other projects, including evaluating developer (i.e., users who are software developers, engineers, architects, or the like) input as to the accuracy, quality, utility, reliability, cohesion, coupling, or other attributes and characteristics associated with prior implementations of an update for a given dependency. In so doing, dependency analysis engine 210 may be in data communication (over data bus 234) with ranking module 218, cooperatively generating a ranking that may be used to sort, filter, and rank updates accordingly. In some examples, rankings may be presented on a user interface (e.g., display, presentation, or the like) by transmitting rendering and display data from display/interface module 214 to communication/API module 224 and then to one or more external displays (not shown). In other examples, rankings may be input to self-learning loop module 220, dependency analysis engine 210, or one or more of repositories 226-230, the latter of which may be any type of data storage facility, such as those described herein, and stored as “dependency data.”


As an input to self-learning loop module 220, update rankings may be retrieved, requested, transmitted, transferred, or otherwise input to self-learning loop module 220, which may be configured to train machine learning algorithm(s) (e.g., machine learning module 208) and/or deep learning algorithm(s) (e.g., deep learning module 206). Machine learning module 208 and deep learning module 206, in some examples, may be trained against data and information from prior updates of source code (i.e., source code or a copy of source code under development may be stored in one or more data repositories such as a local repository (e.g., repository 226), an external repository (e.g., repository 228), or a networked repository (e.g., repository 230, which may be coupled (i.e., in data communication) via data communication link 236 to application 202. Machine learning module 208, deep learning module 206, ranking module 218, and/or rules module 222 may be called, invoked, or otherwise used by self-learning loop module 220 and update/version/compatibility determinator 216 to identify updates for various dependencies (i.e., identified by a developer or user). Update/version/compatibility determinator 216 may be implemented using different configurations to implement a sub-application or sub-tool of application 202, which is configured to evaluate an update to determine suitability for a given dependency and, if so, what version is compatible with said dependency. For example, a dependency that is based on a communication function of a project may be indicated by a developer to identify one or more updates that may be used to write source code to the overall project to fulfill the communication function or feature. Searching for updates, the update/version/compatibility determinator 216 may, in response to queries (some of which may be transmitted over communication/API module 224 to repositories 228-230), locate one or more updates stored in one or more of repositories 226-230. After or coincidental with identifying “appropriate” updates to specified (i.e., whether user or system-specified (i.e., automatic or semi-automatic)), copies of the updates may be retrieved by update/version/compatibility determinator 216. In some examples, “appropriate” may refer to a quantitative or numerical match of one or more attributes of an update for a given dependency based on evaluations performed by deep learning module 206 and/or machine learning module 208 against prior instances (i.e., installations, implementations, or uses) of similar updates or, by evaluating attributes associated with the update(s) against one or more rules (e.g., quantitative thresholds or rules) stored and managed by rules module 222 (which may also include user-specified rules provided via a user interface (not shown) to application 202 via communication/API module 224 and display/interface module 214) managed by rules module 222 and stored, in some examples, in one or more of repositories 226-230.


Here, logic 204 may be configured to send control data or signals to direct self-learning loop module 220 to update a project using the retrieved updates, using input from machine learning module 208 and/or deep learning module 206. As described here, update/version/compatibility determinator 216 may also receive input from one or more of deep learning module 206, machine learning module 208, and self-learning loop module 220 to not only identify an update, but also to identify versions and compatibility thereof. For example, update/version/compatibility determinator 216 may be configured to identify an update relative to a local copy of source code under development. Updates and local copies of source code may be stored in the same, different, or other repositories, including repositories 226-230. In some examples, update/version/compatibility determinator 216 may be an application, applet, script, or the like that is configured to determine whether a given version is compatible with code under development or, in other examples, a newer, older, or different version has a higher level of compatibility, which may be a quantitative value that is determined using various techniques such as referencing stored rules from rules module 222, input from deep learning module 206 or machine learning module 208, input from dependency analysis engine 210, ranking data from ranking module 218, and others, without limitation or restriction.


Also, in other examples, application 202 may be configured to automatically implement pull requests using smart pull engine 212, which may be configured to query, request, and retrieve data on prior pull requests from one or more of repositories 226-230. As used herein, a “pull request” may be an update that was previously committed to a local version of source code (e.g., stored in repository 226) under development, but the updates are also submitted for review and possible merging (i.e., implementation) with other copies of the same or similar source code, updates to which may be managed and maintained by another system. As shown, smart pull engine 212 may be configured to automatically search for, request, retrieve, merge, and commit pull requests for code changes performed to a project based on evaluation of prior pull requests, which may also be evaluated (similarly to updates) by deep learning module 206, machine learning module 208 and self-learning loop module 220.


Using machine, deep, or other types of algorithms, in some examples, application 202 may be configured (using dependency analysis engine 210 and self-learning loop module 220) to identify updates, evaluate compatibility of an update(s) relative to code undergoing development and modification to support or commit code changes for dependencies, which may be based on rankings from prior implementations of ranked updates, manually (e.g., presenting update rankings and receiving input from a user (i.e., developer) indicating selection of one or more updates to be installed, integrated, or otherwise written to source code under development), semi-automatically, or automatically (e.g., ranked updates, when determined, are identified in data and/or signals (e.g., voltage, current, optical, or chemical signaling) transferred to/with dependency analysis engine 210, ranking module 218, and self-learning loop module 220). Using self-learning loop module 220, code modifications and commits for dependencies can be rapidly implemented and managed by eliminating manual review and searching as well as trial-and-error implementations (hereafter “commits” and “implementations” may be used interchangeably for all purposes) of updates. In other examples, the size, shape, quantity, type, configuration, function, or structure of the elements shown in the exemplary application architecture may be varied, without limitation or restriction.



FIG. 3 illustrates an exemplary data flow process for software dependency management. Here, system 300 includes application 302, source code 304 (or a local version thereof), package manager 306, POM files 308, update and versions repository 310, process dependency information 312, information sources 314-316, ranking algorithms 318 (i.e., which may be interchangeable with ranking module 218 (FIG. 2), user interface 320, user input 322, and data source 324. In some examples, self-learning loop module 220 (FIG. 2) may be implemented using elements 318-324 as described herein. In other examples, self-learning loop module 220 (FIG. 2) may be implemented differently and is not limited to the examples provided.


Referring back to FIG. 3, application 302 is an exemplary implementation of techniques described herein for managing dependencies in software development projects. As an application, the described techniques may be implemented as a tool and structured as a standalone or sub-component, module, or element of a software development platform, configured to provide features and functionality for identifying, evaluating, updating, and improving (using self-learning techniques such as machine learning or deep learning algorithms trained against data from prior updates) updates or, in other examples, pull requests. As an example, source code 304 (or a copy thereof) may be evaluated by package manager 306, which is configured to generate and store project object model (i.e., pom files) in POM file repository 308 (e.g., POM files 308), which may be designed, configured, and implemented similar to a repository such as Apache Maven™ developed by Apache Software Foundation of Wilmington, Del., and others. In some examples, files stored in POM files 308 may be any type of file (e.g., .pom, yarn, and others, without limitation or restriction) that includes data or information describing dependencies found in source code undergoing development (e.g., source code 304). By evaluating project object model (or similar types) files from source code 304, package manager 306 can identify dependencies within a given project. When a query, request, or instruction is sent to application 302, package manager 306 can send one or more pom files included in process dependency information data files 312 from pom files repository 308 for source code 304. In other examples, update and versions repository 310 may be configured to store, retrieve, add, delete, modify, or perform other data operations (in various types of programming languages or formats, regardless of whether structured or unstructured) on updates stored therein.


Combined with data from information source 314 (e.g., stored input from a user/developer community using tools such as Stack Overflow, a collaborative, online software developer community-based platform from Stack Exchange Inc. of New York, N.Y.) and other data resulting from analyzing issues in concurrent or prior update or pull request implementations stored in information source 316, process dependency information 312 may be processed and used to rank updates by ranking algorithm 318. Rankings of updates may be performed by using process dependency information 312, data from information sources 314-316, and also from user input 322 (e.g., a user specifies a particular update and/or version thereof, an input is received from user interface 320 a given threshold (e.g., compatibility score, a quantitative threshold (e.g., percentage success rate of update, percentage failure rate, and others))) from user interface 320. In some examples, when an update is installed (i.e., commit (i.e., write operation to source code 304 (“implemented”)), data, attributes, characteristics, information, and other elements associated with the commit may be stored in data source 324, which may also be used by application 302 in other updates or smart pull requests (as described in greater detail below).


In other examples, application 302 may also be referred to as a “self-learning loop” (e.g., self-learning loop module 220 (FIG. 2), and as described in greater detail), which may be implemented as a standalone program or module or integrated or incorporated as an element of another application, program, or platform. As shown, application 302 (used or referenced interchangeably in this Detailed Description with the term “self-learning loop”) includes ranking algorithm 318 (which may include one or more similar or different algorithms of various types, including machine learning or deep learning algorithms configured as sub-modules of ranking algorithm 318 (e.g., deep learning module 206 (FIG. 2), machine learning module 208 (FIG. 2), and others, without limitation or restriction). Here, process dependency information 312, information sources 314-316 may be used by logic such as ranking algorithm 318 to provide a logical loop that is self-learning (e.g., uses machine or deep learning algorithms that are trained against data source 324 (or other data sources)) to identify, evaluate, and rank updates based on various attributes (which may qualitative or quantitative) such as compatibility, success/failure, commit (i.e., write) time, and others, without limitation or restriction. By using self-learned data (i.e., output from deep learning module 206 (FIG. 2) or machine learning module 208 (FIG. 2), or others) such as that generated when updates (e.g., as retrieved from update and versions repository 310) are committed to source code 304 and compiled/executed, ranking algorithm 318 can use process dependency information 312, data source 324, and information sources 314-316 to generate a list or ranking of updates to be presented on user interface 320 (with said list also being stored in data source 324). In other words, ranking algorithm 318 may be implemented with machine learning-type algorithms and software, including deep learning algorithms and other types, and trained against data (i.e., “self-learning”) such as that stored in data source 324, process dependency information 312, information sources 314-316, and others. In other examples, the size, shape, quantity, type, configuration, function, or structure of the elements shown in the exemplary data flow may be varied, without limitation or restriction.



FIG. 4 illustrates an exemplary process for software dependency management. Here, process 400 starts by receiving a query of a repository (i.e., a request for an upgrade of a given dependency as received by application 102 (FIG. 1), application 202 (FIG. 2), or as described herein) (402). Once received, the query is parsed (404). A ranking of updates identified for a given dependency and any versions thereof is generated (406). Once generated, the ranking is provided in response to the initial query, indicating updates and versions thereof (408). In further reply to the initial query, another query may be sent (i.e., from a user interface) (410). In some examples, an additional query may be an input (e.g., data or signal) received at a user interface from a user indicating selection of one or more updates to be implemented (e.g., committed, installed, written, or the like) to source code undergoing software development (e.g., source code 108 (FIG. 1), source code 304 (FIG. 3), or the like). Upon receiving, parsing, and evaluating (e.g., application 102 (FIG. 1), application 202 (FIG. 2), or the like), the additional query initiates retrieval of one or more updates in response (412). In some examples, the additional query may also be configured to identify an update and a version thereof, which may have been determined based on self-learning loop module 220 (FIG. 2) identifying a version of an update that is ranked higher than other versions based on one or more attributes (e.g., compatibility, failure, error, and other types of thresholds, rates, values, indices, or the like, without restriction or limitation). After retrieving an update and its indicated (i.e., indicated by the additional query), implementation may occur by committing or writing it to source code (e.g., source code 108 (FIG. 1), source code 304 (FIG. 3), or the like) (414). In other examples, the scope, order, configuration, function, of the elements shown in the described process may be varied, without limitation or restriction.



FIG. 5 illustrates another exemplary process for software dependency management. Here, process 500 begins by evaluating source code (e.g., source code 108 (FIG. 1), source code 304 (FIG. 3), or the like) (504). Once evaluated, a call or request may be sent to a module or element configured to manage dependencies using the techniques described herein (e.g., dependency management module 104 (FIG. 1), logic 204 (FIG. 2), and others) to a package manager (e.g., package manager 306 (FIG. 3)) to retrieve a file describing dependencies in source undergoing development (504). In some examples, files requested from a package manager (e.g., package manager 306 (FIG. 3)) may be project object model, yarn, or other types of files, without limitation or restriction, such as those found in POM files 308 (FIG. 3).


Referring back to FIG. 5, once a request has been received, a response is formed including a file that is returned to the requesting source (e.g., dependency management module 104 (FIG. 1), logic 204 (FIG. 2), and others) and evaluated to identify dependency(s) in the source code undergoing development (e.g., source code 108 (FIG. 1), source code 304 (FIG. 3), or the like) (506). Once identified, a self-learning loop (e.g., dependency management module 104 and self-learning loop data 110 (FIG. 1), self-learning loop module 220 (FIG. 2), and ranking algorithm 318, user interface 320, user input 322, and data source 324 (FIG. 3), and others, without limitation or restriction) is invoked (508).


Once invoked, a self-learning loop (such as those described in this Detailed Description) may identify and rank updates (and versions thereof) for display on, for example, a user interface (e.g., user interface 320 (FIG. 3)) (510). Once displayed, a user interface may be configured to await further input that, when received, includes an instruction in response to the displayed updates and versions (or identifiers associated with each such that when a user selects an option, data or signals are transmitted from the user interface back to a ranking module (e.g., ranking algorithm 318 (FIG. 3)) as part of a self-learning loop (such as those described herein)) to select one or more of displayed, ranked updates (or versions thereof) for implementation in source code undergoing development (e.g., source code 304 (FIG. 3)) (512). Upon detecting implementation of an update (or version thereof), data associated with the implementation (e.g., data indicating that a given update or version was more compatible than another, data indicating that a given update or version was more popularly selected (despite self-learning loop-generated rankings), data indicating that a given update or version was unavailable, data indicating that a given update or version was superseded, data indicating that a given update or version was cancelled, and the like) may be stored in a data source or repository (e.g., data source 324 (FIG. 3)) and used to train logic such as machine learning algorithms, which may include other types of algorithms such as deep learning, that may be trained against data from implementations (e.g., data source 324 (FIG. 3) (514). In other examples, the scope, order, configuration, function, of the elements shown in the described process may be varied, without limitation or restriction.



FIG. 6 illustrates an exemplary self-learning loop process for software dependency management. Here, process 600 may an example of self-learning loop logic implemented by self-learning loop module 220 (FIG. 2) or as shown and described in FIG. 3. In some examples, self-learning loop logic (which may or may not be implemented as a standalone program, application, module, platform, or other software) starts by identifying a dependency in source code undergoing development (602). Once identified, community data (e.g., Stack Overflow™) from online software development communities, including feedback, data, attributes, and other information related to a given update or version, may be retrieved from an information source or repository (e.g., information source 314 (FIG. 3)) (606). Similarly, analytics data (i.e., data generated from analyzing issues related to the implementation of an update (or version thereof), ranging from implementation attributes (e.g., attributes related to the implementation of an update or version such as memory/storage required, update size, programming language, format, data schema, and the like, without limitation or restriction)) may also be retrieved by, for example, self-learning loop module 220 (FIG. 2) from an information source or repository (e.g., information source 316 (FIG. 3)) (606).


Using information retrieved from various repositories (e.g., data source 324 (FIG. 3), information source 314 (FIG. 3), information source 316 (FIG. 3), and others, without limitation or restriction to the examples shown and described), rankings of identified updates (and/or versions thereof) may be generated by, for example, ranking module 218 (FIG. 2), ranking algorithms 318 (FIG. 3), and others, without limitation or restriction (608). Once generated, rankings may be displayed on a user interface (e.g., user interface 320 (FIG. 3) (610).


Once displayed on user interface, rankings of updates (and/or versions thereof) may be enabled as hyperlinked or other interactive display/presentation/screen elements that, when interacted with (e.g., “clicked on”), a signal or data may be sent to self-learning loop module 220 (FIG. 2), for example, to provide an input indicating selection of an update, and/or version thereof (612). After identifying an update, implementation may occur by committing (i.e., writing) the retrieved update (and the identified version) to source code (e.g., source code 108 (FIG. 1), source code 304 (FIG. 3), or the like) (614). After implementing an update, a determination is made as to whether an error has occurred (i.e., was the implemented update compatible with the source code while also resolving the dependency) (616).


If an error is not detected, data related to the implementation may be stored to a repository such as data source 324 (FIG. 3), or the like (618). However, if the implementation of the identified, selected, and retrieved update generates an error, data related to the error (i.e., indicating lowered or non-compatibility of the update with the given source code under development) may be generated (620). The generated data of the incompatible or lowered compatibility update (and version thereof) may then be stored in a repository such as data source 324 (FIG. 3), or the like (622). Subsequently, self-learning loop logic may be enabled to repeat and await another identification of an update to a dependency to occur. In some examples, the above-described process may be performed automatically or semi-automatically in order to reduce or altogether eliminate manual intervention or input by avoiding unnecessary search and trial-and-error operations that are time consuming and costly to software development environments. In other examples, the scope, order, configuration, function, of the elements shown in the described process may be varied, without limitation or restriction.



FIG. 7 illustrates an exemplary ranking process for software dependency management. Here, process 700 begins by invoking ranking module (e.g., ranking module 218 (FIG. 2)) (702). Invoking a ranking module may include invoking one or more algorithms (e.g., machine, deep, or others, without limitation or restriction) to evaluate and rank (based on user or system-specified rules that may be stored in a repository or module such as rules module 222 (FIG. 2)) updates (and/or versions thereof) that have been identified as related to or associated with a given dependency or multiple dependencies. A ranking module or process (e.g., process 700), once invoked, can retrieve data from multiple sources for use in generating rankings (704). Data such as developer community feedback or input (e.g., individual user or user groups of software developers who have used the identified update previously may provide their input via tools and platforms such as Stack Overflow™, copies of which may also be stored in a repository(s) such as information source 314 (FIG. 3)), analytics data (e.g., information source 316 (FIG. 3)) generated from evaluating or analyzing issues associated with prior implementations of a selected update, and others may be retrieved and evaluated to generate rankings. Data analyzed from developer community feedback or input may be evaluated (706) as well as data resulting from analyzing issues associated with prior implementations (i.e., issues analysis) (708).


In some examples, after evaluating dependency data (e.g., update and versions repository 310 (FIG. 3), process dependency information 312 (FIG. 3), data source 324 (FIG. 3), and the like), community developer feedback and input (e.g., information source 314 (FIG. 3)), and issues analysis data (e.g., information source 316 (FIG. 3)), a determination may be made as to compatibility of a given update for a particular dependency found (i.e., identified) in source code under development (e.g., source code 304 (FIG. 3, and others) (710). Compatibility may encompass a wide range of attributes, variables, selection criteria (e.g., criteria that may be user or system-specified that provides parameters, requirements, limitations, and/or restrictions that determine what updates are available for identification as appropriate updates for particular dependencies), characteristics, and other data that enable a self-learning loop (e.g., self-learning loop module 220 (FIG. 2), and others as described herein) to rank updates identified for given dependencies. Based on the above determinations, a ranking is generated that lists updates (and/or versions thereof) that are available for selection (712). Once identified, ranking data may be transferred from a ranking process (e.g., ranking module 222 (FIG. 2), ranking algorithm(s) 318 (FIG. 3), and the like) to a user interface (e.g., user interface 320 (FIG. 3), and the like) for display/presentation to a user (714). Further, ranking data may also be stored for use in future searches or processes that are instantiated or invoked to identify updates (and/or versions thereof) for a given dependency (716). In other examples, the size, shape, quantity, type, configuration, function, or structure of the elements shown in the described process may be varied, without limitation or restriction.



FIG. 8A illustrates an exemplary smart pull process for software dependency management. Here, process 800 begins by detecting a pull request (802). Identified attributes (e.g., any type of data associated with a completed pull request) of the detected pull request are stored in one or more repositories or other type of data storage facility (e.g., dependency data 112, 116, 122 (FIG. 1), repositories 226-230 (FIG. 2), data source 324 (FIG. 3), or the like) (804). Next, a self-learning loop is invoked to identify, request, select, or rank completed pull requests (i.e., previously-performed/completed/committed pull requests may have data such as associated attributes and characteristics (i.e., “pull request data”) that are stored in a repository (e.g., data source 324 (FIG. 3) and self-learning loop module 220 (FIG. 2), which may be configured to request/retrieve stored pull request data) (806). Pull requests, as described herein, includes updates, modifications, or changes made to source code (e.g., source code 304 (FIG. 3)), which are identified for other developers to use in similar projects (e.g., software development projects where source code is being written, developed, added, deleted, or otherwise modified); in some examples, pull requests can be “pushed” to a software development community or other platform or computing environment.


Referring back to FIG. 8A, a determination is made as to whether logic (e.g., dependency management module 104 (FIG. 1), logic 204 (FIG. 2), self-learning loop module 220 (FIG. 2), ranking algorithm 318 (FIG. 3), or others) detects a pull request has been received (808). If no pull request is received, (i.e., logic such as that described above or as found in application 102 (FIG. 1), application 202 (FIG. 2), application 302 (FIG. 3), or others) monitoring continues for the detection of a completed pull request and process 800 ends (810). Alternatively, if a pull request is received, it may be parsed by smart pull engine 212 (FIG. 2) to identify pull request data associated with previously performed, but similar pull requests (812). Once identified, parsed attributes of a detected pull request may be compared to pull request data retrieved from a repository such as data source 324 (814). In some examples, a determination may be made by comparing pull request data to parsed pull request data (e.g., attributes, characteristics, and other information) of the detected pull request by, for example, self-learning loop module 220 (FIG. 2) (816). If a determination indicates a match or matches are found above a given threshold (which may be determined quantitatively using numerical thresholds or values, or the like), then monitoring is resumed until a pull request is detected (810). However, if a determination indicates a match or matches are found are equal to or below a given threshold (the use of numerical thresholds is an example of a type of comparison that may be performed, but other examples, types, algorithms, software, applications, or other techniques for performing comparisons may be used and are not limited to the examples shown or described), then updated identified within these pull requests are requested from repositories (e.g., update and versions repository 310 (FIG. 3), data source 324 (FIG. 3), or others, without limitation or restriction to type, quantity, configuration, topology, structure, or schema) (818). Upon retrieval, implementations of updates may be performed (820). These updates, if implemented using smart pull techniques such as those described and performed (e.g., by smart pull engine 212 (FIG. 2), automatic implementation of updates (or versions thereof) may be performed without requiring significant developer time. In other words, groups or batches of updates can be performed and committed to source code (e.g., source code 304) by using the above-described process. In other examples, the scope, order, configuration, function, of the elements shown in the described process may be varied, without limitation or restriction.



FIG. 8B illustrates an exemplary continuing smart pull process for software dependency management. Here, process 850 starts by identifying dependencies that were updated in response to a completed pull request (852). Once identified, individual files are modified to implement an update to a given dependency (854). After completing the update to source code (e.g., source code 304 (FIG. 3)), attributes such as those described above may be determined (856). Once attributes associated with a pull request have been determined, these can be stored in a repository such as data source 324 (FIG. 3) (858). Further, as an exemplary technique for identifying a set of attribute data associated with a given pull request (and updates subsumed within said pull request), an identifier may be set and stored with the pull request data in data source 324 (FIG. 3) (860). In other words, when a pull request is completed, attributes are determined and are stored with an identifier that is configured to identify and associate the pull request with, for example, a type or category of pull requests such that, in future smart pull requests, a previously completed pull request can be identified and associated updates can be retrieved. In other examples, the scope, order, configuration, function, of the elements shown in the described process may be varied, without limitation or restriction.



FIG. 9 illustrates an exemplary computing system suitable for software dependency management. In some examples, computer system 900 may be used to implement computer programs, applications, methods, processes, or other software to perform the above-described techniques. Computing system 900 includes a bus 902 or other communication mechanism for communicating information, which interconnects subsystems and devices, such as processor 904, system memory 906 (e.g., RAM), storage device 908 (e.g., ROM), disk drive 910 (e.g., magnetic or optical), communication interface 912 (e.g., modem or Ethernet card), display 914 (e.g., CRT or LCD), input device 916 (e.g., keyboard), cursor control 918 (e.g., mouse or trackball), communication link 920, and network 922.


According to some examples, computing system 800 performs specific operations by processor 904 executing one or more sequences of one or more instructions stored in system memory 906. Such instructions may be read into system memory 906 from another computer readable medium, such as static storage device 908 or disk drive 910. In some examples, hard-wired circuitry may be used in place of or in combination with software instructions for implementation.


The term “computer readable medium” refers to any tangible medium that participates in providing instructions to processor 904 for execution. Such a medium may take many forms, including but not limited to, non-volatile media and volatile media. Non-volatile media includes, for example, optical or magnetic disks, such as disk drive 910. Volatile media includes dynamic memory, such as system memory 906.


Common forms of computer readable media includes, for example, floppy disk, flexible disk, hard disk, magnetic tape, any other magnetic medium, CD-ROM, any other optical medium, punch cards, paper tape, any other physical medium with patterns of holes, RAM, PROM, EPROM, FLASH-EPROM, any other memory chip or cartridge, or any other medium from which a computer can read.


Instructions may further be transmitted or received using a transmission medium. The term “transmission medium” may include any tangible or intangible medium that is capable of storing, encoding or carrying instructions for execution by the machine, and includes digital or analog communications signals or other intangible medium to facilitate communication of such instructions. Transmission media includes coaxial cables, copper wire, and fiber optics, including wires that comprise bus 802 for transmitting a computer data signal.


In some examples, execution of the sequences of instructions may be performed by a single computer system 900. According to some examples, two or more computing system 900 coupled by communication link 920 (e.g., LAN, PSTN, or wireless network) may perform the sequence of instructions in coordination with one another. Computing system 900 may transmit and receive messages, data, and instructions, including program, i.e., application code, through communication link 920 and communication interface 912. Received program code may be executed by processor 904 as it is received, and/or stored in disk drive 910, or other non-volatile storage for later execution. In other examples, the above-described techniques may be implemented differently in design, function, and/or structure and are not intended to be limited to the examples described and/or shown in the drawings.


Although the foregoing examples have been described in some detail for purposes of clarity of understanding, the above-described techniques are not limited to the details provided. There are many alternative ways of implementing the above-described invention techniques. The disclosed examples are illustrative and not restrictive.

Claims
  • 1. A method, comprising: receiving a query of a repository, the repository being configured to store a file identifying a dependency between an application and an update, the query being configured to request retrieval and implementation of the update with the application, the dependency being associated with a program object model file;parsing the query to identify the update and a version of the update configured to modify the application;generating automatically a ranking associated with the update and the version using output from a machine-learning module configured to be trained against data received from a data source, the data being associated with a community, and other data retrieved from another data source, the other data being associated with analyzing an issue associated with the update or the version;providing a response to the query including displaying the ranking, the data, and the other data;searching automatically for code changes performed to implement data representing a project based on evaluation of prior pull requests;receiving another query requesting at least one of the update and the version;retrieving the at least one of the update and the version; andimplementing with the application the at least one of the update and the version, the at least one of the update and the version being retrieved and implemented in response to the another query.
  • 2. The method of claim 1, further comprising: configuring a user interface to receive the another query after the displaying the ranking, the data, and the other data is performed.
  • 3. The method of claim 1, further comprising: retrieving the at least one of the update and the version in response to an input.
  • 4. The method of claim 1, further comprising: retrieving the at least one of the update and the version in response to the another query; andimplementing with the application associated with the dependency the at least one of the update and the version.
  • 5. The method of claim 1, further comprising: invoking a self-learning loop module when the query is detected, the self-learning loop module being configured to reference one or more files stored in the data source and the another data source, the one or more files including one or more attributes associated with the update.
  • 6. The method of claim 1, further comprising: invoking a self-learning loop module when the query is detected, the self-learning loop module being configured to reference one or more files stored in the data source and the another data source, the one or more files including one or more attributes associated with the version.
  • 7. The method of claim 1, further comprising: calling a logic module configured to invoke one or more rules when the query is detected, the one or more rules being associated with the update and the version.
  • 8. The method of claim 1, further comprising: a self-learning loop module configured to rank the update and the version based on an error rate associated with implementing the update or the version with the application, the error rate being determined during compilation of source code associated with the application after the update or the version has been implemented.
  • 9. The method of claim 1, wherein the ranking is generated by a ranking module configured to execute one or more ranking algorithms against the update and the version.
  • 10. The method of claim 1, wherein the output comprises further data received from the community, the further data being used to modify the ranking of the update against the version.
  • 11. The method of claim 1, wherein the other data is generated by analyzing the issue, the issue being associated with an implementation of the update before receiving the query.
  • 12. The method of claim 1, wherein the repository is configured to store a file having dependency data associated with the dependency and the application.
  • 13. The method of claim 1, wherein at least one of the one or more attributes is configured to indicate compatibility between the application and the update and the one or more versions.
  • 14. A system, comprising: a repository configured to store an update and a version of the update, the update and the version being a dependency of an application; anda processor configured to receive a query of the repository, the repository being configured to store a file identifying the dependency between the application, the update, and the version, the query being configured to request retrieval and implementation of the update with the application, the dependency being associated with a program object model file, to parse the query to identify the update and the version of the update configured to modify the application, to generate automatically a ranking associated with the update and the version using output from a machine-learning module configured to be trained against data received from a data source, the data being associated with a community, and other data retrieved from another data source, the other data being associated with analyzing an issue associated with the update or the version, to provide a response to the query including displaying the ranking, the data, and the other data, to search automatically for code changes performed to implement data representing a project based on evaluation of prior pull requests, to receive another query requesting at least one of the update and the version, to retrieve the at least one of the update and the version, and to implement with the application the at least one of the update and the version, the at least one of the update and the version being retrieved and implemented in response to the another query.
  • 15. The system of claim 14, further comprising a ranking module having one or more algorithms configured to rank the update and the version based on further data received from one or more prior implementations of the update.
  • 16. The system of claim 14, wherein the ranking is generated using attributes configured to indicate compatibility between the update, the version, and the application by evaluating an implementation of the update or the version compiled before the query is received.
  • 17. The system of claim 14, wherein the ranking is generated using an attribute configured to indicate compatibility between the update, the version, and the application.
  • 18. The system of claim 14, further comprising a smart pull request module configured to identify the dependency and another dependency, the another dependency invoking another implementation of another update or another version when the update or the version is implemented with the application in response to the another query.
  • 19. The system of claim 14, wherein an attribute is generated by a self-learning loop module by evaluating an implementation of the update or the version to another application that is configured to perform a substantially similar function to the application, the another application also having substantially similar programmatic structure to the application, the attribute being configured to indicate compatibility between the application and the update and the version.
  • 20. A non-transitory computer readable medium having one or more computer program instructions configured to perform a method, the method comprising: receiving a query of a repository, the repository being configured to store a file identifying a dependency between an application and an update, the query being configured to request retrieval and implementation of the update with the application, the dependency being associated with a program object model file;parsing the query to identify the update and a version of the update configured to modify the application;generating automatically a ranking associated with the update and the version using output from a machine-learning module configured to be trained against data received from a data source, the data being associated with a community, and other data retrieved from another data source, the other data being associated with analyzing an issue associated with the update or the version;providing a response to the query including displaying the ranking, the data, and the other data;searching automatically for code changes performed to implement data representing a project based on evaluation of prior pull requests;receiving another query requesting at least one of the update and the version;retrieving the at least one of the update and the version; andimplementing with the application the at least one of the update and the version, the at least one of the update and the version being retrieved and implemented in response to the another query.
US Referenced Citations (490)
Number Name Date Kind
5627764 Schutzman et al. May 1997 A
6041311 Chislenko et al. Mar 2000 A
6146026 Ushiku Nov 2000 A
6363433 Nakajima Mar 2002 B1
6385611 Cardona May 2002 B1
6684239 Flepp et al. Jan 2004 B1
6742032 Castellani et al. May 2004 B1
6871232 Curie et al. Mar 2005 B2
7031952 Heumann et al. Apr 2006 B1
7032030 Codignotto Apr 2006 B1
7130885 Chandra et al. Oct 2006 B2
7222156 Gupta et al. May 2007 B2
7260610 Grooters et al. Aug 2007 B2
7409710 Uchil et al. Aug 2008 B1
7519672 Boss et al. Apr 2009 B2
7590636 Heumann et al. Sep 2009 B1
7606865 Kumar et al. Oct 2009 B2
7644057 Nelken et al. Jan 2010 B2
7702541 Black et al. Apr 2010 B2
7725492 Sittig et al. May 2010 B2
7751620 Cosoi Jul 2010 B1
7756926 Tseng et al. Jul 2010 B2
7792948 Zhao et al. Sep 2010 B2
7818758 Bonet et al. Oct 2010 B2
7831912 King et al. Nov 2010 B2
7853565 Liskov Dec 2010 B1
7979369 Grenier et al. Jul 2011 B2
8006187 Bailey et al. Aug 2011 B1
8027931 Kalaboukis Sep 2011 B2
8082308 Filev Dec 2011 B1
8095967 Loesch et al. Jan 2012 B2
8131745 Hoffman et al. Mar 2012 B1
8171128 Zuckerberg et al. May 2012 B2
8200527 Thompson et al. Jun 2012 B1
8225376 Zuckerberg et al. Jul 2012 B2
8286154 Kaakani et al. Oct 2012 B2
8321300 Bockius et al. Nov 2012 B1
8412657 Grenier et al. Apr 2013 B2
8437369 Shaikli May 2013 B2
8505069 Solodovnikov et al. Aug 2013 B1
8606792 Jackson et al. Dec 2013 B1
8615442 Kapur et al. Dec 2013 B1
8707297 Brown Apr 2014 B2
8738715 Roy et al. May 2014 B2
8744937 Seubert et al. Jun 2014 B2
8752041 Akiyoshi et al. Jun 2014 B2
8767020 Monikandan Jul 2014 B1
8769417 Robinson et al. Jul 2014 B1
8813125 Reisman Aug 2014 B2
8825515 Hanson Sep 2014 B1
8886580 Grenier et al. Nov 2014 B2
8892524 Lee et al. Nov 2014 B1
8943069 Heumann et al. Jan 2015 B2
8972428 Dicker et al. Mar 2015 B2
9021361 Pettinati et al. Apr 2015 B1
9037735 Fallows et al. May 2015 B1
9105044 Wu Aug 2015 B2
9131382 Johns Sep 2015 B1
9141997 Gaedcke et al. Sep 2015 B2
9143478 Ramaswamy Sep 2015 B2
9191235 Clagg et al. Nov 2015 B2
9229702 Kapulkin et al. Jan 2016 B1
9251360 Meyer et al. Feb 2016 B2
9282098 Hitchcock et al. Mar 2016 B1
9286102 Harel et al. Mar 2016 B1
9311683 Saylor et al. Apr 2016 B1
9325696 Balfanz et al. Apr 2016 B1
9338186 Wollenstein et al. May 2016 B2
9369454 Porzio et al. Jun 2016 B2
9378295 Marra et al. Jun 2016 B1
9483802 Gaedcke et al. Nov 2016 B2
9501746 Prakash Nov 2016 B2
9509742 Gordon Nov 2016 B2
9514459 Doshi et al. Dec 2016 B1
9519723 Lorenz et al. Dec 2016 B2
9596206 Bueno et al. Mar 2017 B2
9596223 Mezei et al. Mar 2017 B1
9619531 Wu Apr 2017 B2
9654450 Ford et al. May 2017 B2
9756098 Kazerani et al. Sep 2017 B2
9787664 Subbiah et al. Oct 2017 B1
9800639 Gordon Oct 2017 B2
9953063 Spasojevic et al. Apr 2018 B2
10084838 Gordon et al. Sep 2018 B2
10142386 Gordon Nov 2018 B2
10178173 Kadowaki et al. Jan 2019 B2
10180971 Bhave et al. Jan 2019 B2
10188905 Dohlen Jan 2019 B2
10204344 Gaedcke et al. Feb 2019 B2
10204383 Gaedcke et al. Feb 2019 B2
10264042 Gordon Apr 2019 B2
10264073 Kadowaki et al. Apr 2019 B2
10268726 Schiesser Apr 2019 B1
10277928 Joliveau et al. Apr 2019 B1
10277929 McLeod et al. Apr 2019 B1
10284723 Neuer, III et al. May 2019 B1
10346449 Senftleber et al. Jul 2019 B2
10417180 Patwardhan Sep 2019 B1
10430894 Wu Oct 2019 B2
10489866 Gaedcke et al. Nov 2019 B2
10491490 Sridhar et al. Nov 2019 B2
10497069 Gaedcke et al. Dec 2019 B2
10528406 Klemenz Jan 2020 B2
10554697 Ledet Feb 2020 B1
10560492 Ledet Feb 2020 B1
10594773 Falcao et al. Mar 2020 B2
10601937 Holzband et al. Mar 2020 B2
10613745 Mohseni Apr 2020 B2
10785222 Senftleber et al. Sep 2020 B2
10855657 Senftleber et al. Dec 2020 B2
10867131 Scott et al. Dec 2020 B2
10887302 Thakkar Jan 2021 B2
10902462 Savage et al. Jan 2021 B2
10904639 Benson et al. Jan 2021 B1
10931540 Davis et al. Feb 2021 B2
10956459 Senftleber et al. Mar 2021 B2
10999278 Senftleber et al. May 2021 B2
11050704 Senftleber et al. Jun 2021 B2
11061900 Falcao et al. Jul 2021 B2
11087261 Basu et al. Aug 2021 B1
11101271 Ramaswamy Aug 2021 B2
11153726 Cheung et al. Oct 2021 B2
11284221 Guo et al. Mar 2022 B2
20010025253 Heintz et al. Sep 2001 A1
20010037469 Gupta et al. Nov 2001 A1
20010042087 Kephart et al. Nov 2001 A1
20010047290 Petras et al. Nov 2001 A1
20020010746 Jilk et al. Jan 2002 A1
20020049793 Okumura et al. Apr 2002 A1
20020070953 Barg et al. Jun 2002 A1
20020105545 Carter et al. Aug 2002 A1
20020144156 Copeland Oct 2002 A1
20030005103 Narad et al. Jan 2003 A1
20030028525 Santos et al. Feb 2003 A1
20030078959 Yeung et al. Apr 2003 A1
20030128203 Marshall et al. Jul 2003 A1
20030135565 Estrada Jul 2003 A1
20030187871 Amano et al. Oct 2003 A1
20030225850 Teague Dec 2003 A1
20040049673 Song et al. Mar 2004 A1
20040073666 Foster et al. Apr 2004 A1
20040133697 Mamaghani et al. Jul 2004 A1
20040174397 Cereghini et al. Sep 2004 A1
20040199595 Banister et al. Oct 2004 A1
20050060643 Glass et al. Mar 2005 A1
20050074126 Stanko Apr 2005 A1
20050132348 Meulemans et al. Jun 2005 A1
20050206644 Kincaid Sep 2005 A1
20050283614 Hardt Dec 2005 A1
20060010215 Clegg et al. Jan 2006 A1
20060036685 Canning et al. Feb 2006 A1
20060129602 Witriol et al. Jun 2006 A1
20060143307 Codignotto Jun 2006 A1
20060155581 Eisenberger et al. Jul 2006 A1
20060185021 Dujari et al. Aug 2006 A1
20060206578 Heidloff et al. Sep 2006 A1
20060265740 Clark et al. Nov 2006 A1
20060294196 Feirouz et al. Dec 2006 A1
20070083536 Darnell et al. Apr 2007 A1
20070118889 Fredell May 2007 A1
20070136354 Chen Jun 2007 A1
20070171716 Wright et al. Jul 2007 A1
20070180486 Yoon Aug 2007 A1
20070220029 Jones et al. Sep 2007 A1
20070226177 Barsness et al. Sep 2007 A1
20070240119 Ducheneaut et al. Oct 2007 A1
20070282800 England et al. Dec 2007 A1
20070286528 Podilchuk Dec 2007 A1
20070289006 Ramachandran et al. Dec 2007 A1
20080005284 Ungar et al. Jan 2008 A1
20080033776 Marchese Feb 2008 A1
20080034058 Korman et al. Feb 2008 A1
20080040673 Zuckerberg et al. Feb 2008 A1
20080103906 Singh May 2008 A1
20080109245 Gupta May 2008 A1
20080109491 Gupta May 2008 A1
20080120379 Malik May 2008 A1
20080126476 Nicholas et al. May 2008 A1
20080133488 Bandaru et al. Jun 2008 A1
20080178125 Elsbree et al. Jul 2008 A1
20080189406 Shen Aug 2008 A1
20080201344 Levergood et al. Aug 2008 A1
20080215591 Howard et al. Sep 2008 A1
20080221870 Attardi et al. Sep 2008 A1
20080225848 Pilon et al. Sep 2008 A1
20080263603 Murray et al. Oct 2008 A1
20080294680 Powell et al. Nov 2008 A1
20080306830 Lasa et al. Dec 2008 A1
20090013043 Tan Jan 2009 A1
20090043852 Weir et al. Feb 2009 A1
20090089657 Davis Apr 2009 A1
20090106080 Carrier et al. Apr 2009 A1
20090132311 Klinger et al. May 2009 A1
20090138472 MacLean May 2009 A1
20090144723 Hartin et al. Jun 2009 A1
20090157667 Brougher et al. Jun 2009 A1
20090157708 Bandini et al. Jun 2009 A1
20090157899 Gagliardi et al. Jun 2009 A1
20090158265 Davis et al. Jun 2009 A1
20090177670 Grenier et al. Jul 2009 A1
20090181649 Bull et al. Jul 2009 A1
20090210282 Elenbaas et al. Aug 2009 A1
20090249451 Su et al. Oct 2009 A1
20090292608 Polachek Nov 2009 A1
20090292722 Ayloo Nov 2009 A1
20090300036 Nagasaki Dec 2009 A1
20090328025 Johnson Dec 2009 A1
20100071052 Mao et al. Mar 2010 A1
20100082503 Kantak et al. Apr 2010 A1
20100106730 Aminian et al. Apr 2010 A1
20100119053 Goeldi May 2010 A1
20100121707 Goeldi May 2010 A1
20100121843 Goeldi May 2010 A1
20100153516 Weinberg et al. Jun 2010 A1
20100169148 Oberhofer et al. Jul 2010 A1
20100174813 Hildreth et al. Jul 2010 A1
20100205663 Ward et al. Aug 2010 A1
20100211911 Logan et al. Aug 2010 A1
20100223341 Manolescu et al. Sep 2010 A1
20100246797 Chavez et al. Sep 2010 A1
20100250683 Hoyne et al. Sep 2010 A1
20100257117 Shvadron et al. Oct 2010 A1
20100274732 Grinchenko et al. Oct 2010 A1
20100281258 Andress et al. Nov 2010 A1
20100287512 Gan et al. Nov 2010 A1
20100293560 Bland et al. Nov 2010 A1
20100306122 Shaffer Dec 2010 A1
20100306528 Andress et al. Dec 2010 A1
20100312769 Bailey et al. Dec 2010 A1
20110004922 Bono et al. Jan 2011 A1
20110055217 Kamel et al. Mar 2011 A1
20110055264 Sundelin et al. Mar 2011 A1
20110077988 Cates et al. Mar 2011 A1
20110113041 Hawthorne et al. May 2011 A1
20110119593 Jacobson et al. May 2011 A1
20110125826 Erhart et al. May 2011 A1
20110144801 Selker et al. Jun 2011 A1
20110153603 Adiba et al. Jun 2011 A1
20110196931 Clagg et al. Aug 2011 A1
20110197146 Goto et al. Aug 2011 A1
20110212430 Smithmier et al. Sep 2011 A1
20110219087 Jorasch et al. Sep 2011 A1
20110246513 Covannon et al. Oct 2011 A1
20110283366 Kwon et al. Nov 2011 A1
20110289574 Hull et al. Nov 2011 A1
20110302653 Frantz et al. Dec 2011 A1
20110320818 Krishna et al. Dec 2011 A1
20120036080 Singer et al. Feb 2012 A1
20120054135 Salaka et al. Mar 2012 A1
20120076367 Tseng Mar 2012 A1
20120077158 Jastrzembski et al. Mar 2012 A1
20120089706 Collins et al. Apr 2012 A1
20120095861 Feng et al. Apr 2012 A1
20120102021 Hill et al. Apr 2012 A1
20120117059 Bailey et al. May 2012 A1
20120131653 Pasquero et al. May 2012 A1
20120150759 Tarjan Jun 2012 A1
20120158632 Grenier et al. Jun 2012 A1
20120195422 Famous Aug 2012 A1
20120198197 Gladwin et al. Aug 2012 A1
20120208568 Cooley Aug 2012 A1
20120210119 Baxter et al. Aug 2012 A1
20120232953 Custer Sep 2012 A1
20120254321 Lindsay et al. Oct 2012 A1
20120265806 Blanchflower et al. Oct 2012 A1
20120271729 Vincelette et al. Oct 2012 A1
20120284155 Holten et al. Nov 2012 A1
20120290605 Ickman et al. Nov 2012 A1
20120303659 Erhart et al. Nov 2012 A1
20120310942 Haynes et al. Dec 2012 A1
20120317198 Patton et al. Dec 2012 A1
20120331406 Baird et al. Dec 2012 A1
20130006403 Moore et al. Jan 2013 A1
20130007121 Fontenot et al. Jan 2013 A1
20130018957 Parnaby et al. Jan 2013 A1
20130024522 Pierre et al. Jan 2013 A1
20130047149 Xu et al. Feb 2013 A1
20130050747 Cok et al. Feb 2013 A1
20130066876 Raskino et al. Mar 2013 A1
20130110946 Bradshaw May 2013 A1
20130116044 Schwartz May 2013 A1
20130126042 Dewald et al. May 2013 A1
20130138428 Chandramouli et al. May 2013 A1
20130138742 Dziubinski May 2013 A1
20130159472 Newton et al. Jun 2013 A1
20130198260 Dow et al. Aug 2013 A1
20130212349 Maruyama Aug 2013 A1
20130218801 Rago Aug 2013 A1
20130218865 Angulo et al. Aug 2013 A1
20130232336 Cheung et al. Sep 2013 A1
20130235069 Ubillos et al. Sep 2013 A1
20130275958 Ivanov Oct 2013 A1
20130282417 Gaedcke et al. Oct 2013 A1
20130282594 Gaedcke et al. Oct 2013 A1
20130282603 Gaedcke et al. Oct 2013 A1
20130282722 Grenier et al. Oct 2013 A1
20130291058 Wollenstein et al. Oct 2013 A1
20130298038 Spivack et al. Nov 2013 A1
20130304726 Sandulescu et al. Nov 2013 A1
20130304758 Gruber et al. Nov 2013 A1
20130318156 Friedman et al. Nov 2013 A1
20130332262 Hunt et al. Dec 2013 A1
20130332263 Vora et al. Dec 2013 A1
20130346872 Scott et al. Dec 2013 A1
20140006524 Singh et al. Jan 2014 A1
20140032306 Sukornyk et al. Jan 2014 A1
20140040275 Dang et al. Feb 2014 A1
20140040377 Friedman et al. Feb 2014 A1
20140040993 Lorenzo et al. Feb 2014 A1
20140047429 Gaither et al. Feb 2014 A1
20140067520 Campanile Mar 2014 A1
20140074844 Subramanian et al. Mar 2014 A1
20140075004 Dusen et al. Mar 2014 A1
20140082072 Kass et al. Mar 2014 A1
20140082749 Holland et al. Mar 2014 A1
20140108675 Wu Apr 2014 A1
20140109205 Lymer et al. Apr 2014 A1
20140164352 Denninghoff Jun 2014 A1
20140173444 Wu Jun 2014 A1
20140173501 Wu Jun 2014 A1
20140173509 Wu Jun 2014 A1
20140181087 Wu Jun 2014 A1
20140181194 Sullivan Jun 2014 A1
20140181728 Wu Jun 2014 A1
20140184841 Woo et al. Jul 2014 A1
20140189808 Mahaffey et al. Jul 2014 A1
20140200989 Kassko et al. Jul 2014 A1
20140222834 Parikh et al. Aug 2014 A1
20140223527 Bortz et al. Aug 2014 A1
20140244621 Lindsay Aug 2014 A1
20140245326 Kruglick Aug 2014 A1
20140278785 Gaedcke et al. Sep 2014 A1
20140280113 Hohwald Sep 2014 A1
20140280398 Smith et al. Sep 2014 A1
20140289034 Wu Sep 2014 A1
20140298199 Johnson, Jr. et al. Oct 2014 A1
20140304249 Ayzenshtat et al. Oct 2014 A1
20140324902 Morris et al. Oct 2014 A1
20140337953 Banatwala et al. Nov 2014 A1
20140358911 McCarthy et al. Dec 2014 A1
20150006708 Banke et al. Jan 2015 A1
20150032492 Ting et al. Jan 2015 A1
20150032751 Ting et al. Jan 2015 A1
20150039705 Kursun Feb 2015 A1
20150067160 Sridhar et al. Mar 2015 A1
20150095307 Bensberg et al. Apr 2015 A1
20150100537 Grieves et al. Apr 2015 A1
20150112918 Zheng et al. Apr 2015 A1
20150120713 Kim et al. Apr 2015 A1
20150127453 Tew et al. May 2015 A1
20150134457 Cheung et al. May 2015 A1
20150134579 Zaman et al. May 2015 A1
20150142748 Gottemukkula et al. May 2015 A1
20150161211 Patel et al. Jun 2015 A1
20150170294 Goyal et al. Jun 2015 A1
20150188907 Khalid et al. Jul 2015 A1
20150193504 Naidu et al. Jul 2015 A1
20150244706 Grajek et al. Aug 2015 A1
20150281227 Ivey et al. Oct 2015 A1
20150286643 Kumar et al. Oct 2015 A1
20150288522 McCoy et al. Oct 2015 A1
20150295869 Li et al. Oct 2015 A1
20150310018 Fan et al. Oct 2015 A1
20150310020 Brav et al. Oct 2015 A1
20150310571 Brav et al. Oct 2015 A1
20150312200 Brav et al. Oct 2015 A1
20150334102 Haugsnes Nov 2015 A1
20150347616 Levi et al. Dec 2015 A1
20150347618 Ogita Dec 2015 A1
20150381552 Vijay et al. Dec 2015 A1
20160019628 Udumudi et al. Jan 2016 A1
20160021097 Shrotri Jan 2016 A1
20160034551 Huang et al. Feb 2016 A1
20160042053 Webber Feb 2016 A1
20160055250 Rush Feb 2016 A1
20160055541 Calistri-Yeh Feb 2016 A1
20160057576 Kessler et al. Feb 2016 A1
20160073166 Hu et al. Mar 2016 A1
20160080445 Kazerani et al. Mar 2016 A1
20160110688 Knox et al. Apr 2016 A1
20160125157 Wu May 2016 A1
20160132904 Mondal et al. May 2016 A1
20160132973 Wu May 2016 A1
20160134580 Castera et al. May 2016 A1
20160147760 Anandhavelu et al. May 2016 A1
20160151704 Wu Jun 2016 A1
20160164863 Hitchcock et al. Jun 2016 A1
20160203221 Rao et al. Jul 2016 A1
20160203523 Spasojevic et al. Jul 2016 A1
20160210555 Murphy et al. Jul 2016 A1
20160212100 Banerjee Jul 2016 A1
20160255034 Yuan Sep 2016 A1
20160269344 Anders et al. Sep 2016 A1
20160320926 Ganin et al. Nov 2016 A1
20160321261 Spasojevic et al. Nov 2016 A1
20160321562 Zeng Nov 2016 A1
20160321694 Vorozhtsov Nov 2016 A1
20160330266 Bakhmutov Nov 2016 A1
20160335572 Bennett et al. Nov 2016 A1
20160345074 Serbest et al. Nov 2016 A1
20160352667 Pickett et al. Dec 2016 A1
20160378826 Bensberg et al. Dec 2016 A1
20170012951 Mennes et al. Jan 2017 A1
20170046112 Keller et al. Feb 2017 A1
20170048237 Pfitzmann et al. Feb 2017 A1
20170061248 Ryan, Jr. et al. Mar 2017 A1
20170093839 Whiteside et al. Mar 2017 A1
20170132276 Saurabh et al. May 2017 A1
20170154356 Trevisiol et al. Jun 2017 A1
20170154366 Turgeman Jun 2017 A1
20170177562 Scott et al. Jun 2017 A1
20170180294 Milligan et al. Jun 2017 A1
20170187838 Sankaranarasimhan Jun 2017 A1
20170193546 Bennett et al. Jul 2017 A1
20170255536 Weissinger et al. Sep 2017 A1
20170264619 Narayanaswamy et al. Sep 2017 A1
20170278174 Harrell Sep 2017 A1
20170300490 Kachemir et al. Oct 2017 A1
20170339563 Singleton, IV Nov 2017 A1
20170344748 Ghani et al. Nov 2017 A1
20170366636 Wang et al. Dec 2017 A1
20180027075 Schoeffler et al. Jan 2018 A1
20180041336 Keshava et al. Feb 2018 A1
20180053114 Adjaoute Feb 2018 A1
20180081983 Carru et al. Mar 2018 A1
20180089328 Bath et al. Mar 2018 A1
20180091468 Yong et al. Mar 2018 A1
20180097802 Lander et al. Apr 2018 A1
20180115473 Sridhar et al. Apr 2018 A1
20180144389 Fredrich et al. May 2018 A1
20180152471 Jakobsson May 2018 A1
20180211285 Todasco et al. Jul 2018 A1
20180219830 O'Brien et al. Aug 2018 A1
20180219849 Jones et al. Aug 2018 A1
20180267951 Moah et al. Sep 2018 A1
20180278503 Carey et al. Sep 2018 A1
20180293607 Huddleston et al. Oct 2018 A1
20180295137 Zager et al. Oct 2018 A1
20180329565 Yeung et al. Nov 2018 A1
20180332079 Ashley et al. Nov 2018 A1
20180337871 Matta et al. Nov 2018 A1
20180337907 Bhansali et al. Nov 2018 A1
20180337910 Gustavson et al. Nov 2018 A1
20180367484 Rodriguez et al. Dec 2018 A1
20180374374 Watson et al. Dec 2018 A1
20190057204 Marcovecchio et al. Feb 2019 A1
20190114356 Senftleber et al. Apr 2019 A1
20190116137 Senftleber et al. Apr 2019 A1
20190116148 Senftleber et al. Apr 2019 A1
20190129701 Hawrylo May 2019 A1
20190158610 Holzband et al. May 2019 A1
20190159166 Aggarwal et al. May 2019 A1
20190171753 Teng et al. Jun 2019 A1
20190199711 Petrovichev et al. Jun 2019 A1
20190228093 Falcao et al. Jul 2019 A1
20190230151 Falcao et al. Jul 2019 A1
20190245751 Wong Aug 2019 A1
20190306248 Swarangi et al. Oct 2019 A1
20190347984 Hintermeister Nov 2019 A1
20190354709 Brinskelle Nov 2019 A1
20200007530 Abdul et al. Jan 2020 A1
20200051120 Senftleber et al. Feb 2020 A1
20200053094 Kaube et al. Feb 2020 A1
20200099676 Desarda et al. Mar 2020 A1
20200104478 Chauhan Apr 2020 A1
20200120068 Senftleber et al. Apr 2020 A1
20200120095 Senftleber et al. Apr 2020 A1
20200120096 Senftleber et al. Apr 2020 A1
20200120167 Senftleber et al. Apr 2020 A1
20200151829 Wu May 2020 A1
20200184575 Gaedcke et al. Jun 2020 A1
20200258091 Gaedcke et al. Aug 2020 A1
20200287957 Falcao et al. Sep 2020 A1
20200329110 Holzband et al. Oct 2020 A1
20200358755 Abdul et al. Nov 2020 A1
20200366564 Davis et al. Nov 2020 A1
20200372539 Shenfeld et al. Nov 2020 A1
20210056006 Mahajan Feb 2021 A1
20210119967 Senftleber et al. Apr 2021 A1
20210174391 Savage et al. Jun 2021 A1
20210176136 Davis et al. Jun 2021 A1
20210226952 Senftleber et al. Jul 2021 A1
20210250341 Senftleber et al. Aug 2021 A1
20210256041 Senftleber et al. Aug 2021 A1
20210328961 Senftleber et al. Oct 2021 A1
20210357408 Falcao et al. Nov 2021 A1
20220094683 Bishop, III et al. Mar 2022 A1
20220124081 Gustavson et al. Apr 2022 A1
20220166735 Evans et al. May 2022 A1
20220232086 Holzband et al. Jul 2022 A1
Foreign Referenced Citations (14)
Number Date Country
2719285 Aug 2016 CA
102054033 May 2011 CN
103177095 Dec 2015 CN
2031793 Mar 2009 EP
2857993 Aug 2017 EP
2009047674 Apr 2009 WO
2013158839 Oct 2013 WO
2014089460 Jun 2014 WO
2014153463 Jan 2015 WO
2015013436 Jan 2015 WO
2016114841 Jul 2016 WO
2019075284 Apr 2019 WO
2019144159 Jul 2019 WO
2020232311 Nov 2020 WO
Non-Patent Literature Citations (170)
Entry
Antoniades et al., “we.b: The web of short URLs,” Apr. 2011, Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on World Wide Web, Mar. 28-Apr. 1, 2011, Hyderabad, India, pp. 715-724 (Year: 2011).
Dinh, Khanh Q., Non-Final Office Action dated Mar. 17, 2021 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/820,697.
Dinh, Khanh Q., Notice of Allowance and Fee(s) Due dated Apr. 16, 2021 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/820,697.
Fiorillo, James N., Non-Final Office Action dated Jun. 7, 2021 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/827,625.
Frunzi, Victoria E., Final Office Action dated May 17, 2021 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/590,218.
Frunzi, Victoria E., Non-Final Office Action dated Dec. 21, 2020 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/590,218.
Goldberg, Ivan R., Final Office Action dated Jun. 29, 2021 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/695,098.
Goldberg, Ivan R., Final Office Action dated Jun. 29, 2021 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/701,143.
Goldberg, Ivan R., Non-Final Office Action dated Mar. 10, 2021 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/695,098.
Goldberg, Ivan R., Non-Final Office Action dated Mar. 3, 2021 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/701,143.
M. Rowe and H. Alani, “What Makes Communities Tick? Community Health Analysis Using Role Compositions,” 2012 International Conference on Privacy, Security, Risk and Trust and 2012 International Conference on Social Computing, Amsterdam, Netherlands, 2012, pp. 267-276, doing:10.1109/SocialCom-PASSAT2012.18.
Mesa, Joel, Notice of Allowance and Fee(s) Due dated Feb. 24, 2021 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/782,635.
Nano, Sargon N., Notice of Allowance and Fee(s) Due dated May 19, 2021 for U.S. Appl. No. 17/026,152.
Neuman, Clifford B., Proxy-Based Authorization and Accounting for Distributed Systems, IEEE 1993 (Year: 1993).
Rashid, Ishrat, Final Office Action dated Jun. 15, 2021 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/782,653.
Rashid, Ishrat, Non-Final Office Action dated Apr. 2, 2021 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/782,653.
Shaw, Robert A., Final Office Action dated Mar. 16, 2021 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/158,169.
U.S. Appl. No. 11/333,826, filed Jan. 17, 2006 and entitled, “Knowledge Filter”.
U.S. Appl. No. 11/692,169, filed Mar. 27, 2007 and entitled, “Knowledge Filter”.
U.S. Appl. No. 60/158,496, filed Oct. 8, 1999 and entitled, “Knowledge Filter”.
U.S. Appl. No. 60/816,100, filed Jun. 22, 2006 and entitled, “Knowledge Filter”.
U.S. Appl. No. 60/816,900, filed Jun. 26, 2006 and entitled, “Knowledge Filter”.
“Craigslist Online Community.” Craigslist.org. Jul. 6, 2010.
Ahmed, Saba, Final Office Action dated Jun. 29, 2016 for U.S. Appl. No. 14/098,492.
Ahmed, Saba, Non-Final Office Action dated Nov. 19, 2015 for U.S. Appl. No. 14/098,492.
Anicas, Mitchell; An Introduction to OAuth 2, DigitalOcean, Published Jul. 21, 2014, pp. 1-18.
Arentz et al., Classifying offensive sites based on image content, Computer Vision and Image Understanding 94, 295-310, 2004.
Bista, Sanat Kumar et al., “Using Gamification in an Online Community,” CSIRO ITC Centre, Conference Paper, 2012.
Blaufeld, Justin R., Final Office Action dated Mar. 24, 2016 for U.S. Appl. No. 14/098,501.
Blaufeld, Justin R., Non-Final Office Action dated Sep. 24, 2015 for U.S. Appl. No. 14/098,501.
Bostock, Mike, Sankey Diagram, available at http://bost.ocks.org/mike/sankey, published May 21, 2012, 1 pg.
Brown Jr., Nathan H., Final Office Action dated Mar. 29, 2011 for U.S. Appl. No. 11/971,856.
Brown Jr., Nathan H., Non-Final Office Action dated Jun. 6, 2012 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/167,482.
Brown Jr., Nathan H., Non-Final Office Action dated Mar. 24, 2014 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/780,487.
Brown Jr., Nathan H., Non-Final Office Action dated Nov. 26, 2010 for U.S. Appl. No. 11/971,856.
Bui, Hanh Thi Minh, Non-Final Office Action dated Mar. 13, 2015 for U.S. Appl. No. 14/012,978.
Cannell, Larry, “Windows 7 Federated Search and SharePoint 2010” online article dated Jun. 2010 <http://blogs.gartner.com/larry-cannell/2010/09/09/windows-7-federated-search-and-sharepoint-2010/[May 13, 2016 12:36:15 PM].
Chung, Mong-Shune, Non-Final Office Action dated Jan. 29, 2016 for U.S. Appl. No. 14/098,505.
Constine, Josh, “Facebook tests notification unsubscribe button for feed posts,” Aug. 9, 2010. http://www.adweek.com/socialtime/unsubscribe-button-posts/244868.
Dagnew, Saba, Final Office Action dated Feb. 12, 2020 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/581,795.
Dagnew, Saba, Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 15/581,795 dated Sep. 16, 2019.
Dinh, Khanh Q., Notice of Allowance and Fee(s) Due dated Oct. 29, 2019 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/877,379.
Dwyer, Cameron, “Five out-of-the-box ways to get Email into SharePoint” Jan. 2012, <https://camerondwyer.wordpress.com/2012/09/04/five-out-of-the-box-ways-to-get-email-into-sharepoint/[May 13, 2016 10:48:43 AM].
Emojipedia, (https://web.archive.org/web/20150915110235/https://emojipedia.org/fisted-hand-sign/), Date: Sep. 15, 2015; (https://web.archive.org/web/20150823012626/https://emojipedia.org/clapping-hands-sign/), Date: Aug. 23, 2015; (https://web.archive.org/web/20150829090848/https://emojipedia.org/smiling-face-with-sunglasses/), Date: Aug. 29, 2015.
Falcao et al., U.S. Appl. No. 15/877,379, filed Jan. 22, 2018 and entitled, “Temporal Optimization of Data Operations Using Distributed Search and Server Management.”
Falcao et al., U.S. Appl. No. 15/877,381, filed Jan. 22, 2018 and entitled, “Temporal Optimization of Data Operations Using Distributed Search and Server Management.”
Fett et al., The Web SSO Standard OpenID Connect: In-Depth Formal Security Analysis and Security Guidelines, 2017 IEEE 30th Computer Security Foundations Symposium (Year: 2017).
Filipczyk, Marcin R., Final Office Action dated Oct. 5, 2015 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/950,268.
Filipczyk, Marcin R., Non-Final Office Action dated Mar. 10, 2016 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/950,268.
Filipczyk, Marcin R., Non-Final Office action dated May 22, 2015 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/950,268.
Fiorillo, James N., Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 15/821,543 dated Aug. 16, 2019.
Fiorillo, James N., Notice of Allowance and Fee(s) Due dated Nov. 14, 2019 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/821,543.
Friedman et al., U.S. Appl. No. 61/650,849, filed May 23, 2012 and entitled, “Dynamic Information Streams in a Social Network Platform.”
Frunzi, Victoria E., Non-Final Office Action dated Oct. 16, 2018 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/018,787.
Gaedckle et al., U.S. Appl. No. 61/636,132, filed Apr. 20, 2012 and entitled, “System and Method for Providing a Social Customer Care System.”
Georgandellis, Andrew C., Final Office Action dated Mar. 30, 2016 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/900,878.
Georgandellis, Andrew C., Final Office Action dated Oct. 26, 2017 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/900,878.
Georgandellis, Andrew C., Final Office Action dated Sep. 21, 2016 for U.S. Appl. No. 14/035,166.
Georgandellis, Andrew C., Non-Final Office Action dated Jan. 26, 2017 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/900,878.
Georgandellis, Andrew C., Non-Final Office Action dated Jul. 11, 2016 for U.S. Appl. No. 14/035,166.
Georgandellis, Andrew C., Non-Final Office Action dated May 23, 2017 for U.S. Appl. No. 14/035,166.
Georgandellis, Andrew C., Non-Final Office Action dated Nov. 3, 2015 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/900,878.
Giphy, (https://web.archive.org/web/20140813065113/http://giphy.com/search/happy), Date: Aug. 13, 2014; https://web.archive.org/web20141231135329/https://giphy.com/upload, Date: Dec. 31, 2014; https://web.archive.org/web/20150919214012/http://giphy.com/create/upload, Date: Sep. 19, 2015.
Goldberg, Ivan R., Final Office Action dated Jan. 12, 2015 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/835,502.
Goldberg, Ivan R., Final Office Action dated Jan. 13, 2015 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/835,250.
Hashemi, Mazdak, “The Infrastructure Behind Twitter: Scale”, Jan. 19, 2017, Twitter, Inc. Blog Post, https://blog.twitter.com/engineering/en_us/topics/infrastructure/2017/the-infrastructure-behind-twitter-scale.html.
Hatcher, Deirdre D., Non-Final Office Action dated Jan. 14, 2016 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/950,258.
Holzband et al., U.S. Appl. No. 15/821,543, filed Nov. 22, 2017 and entitled, “Responsive Action Prediction Based on Electronic Messages Among a System of Networked Computing Devices.”
Jang, Gijeong, Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority and International Search Report dated Jul. 28, 2015 for International Patent Application No. PCT/US2014/047866.
Jou et al., “Predicting Viewer Perceived Emotions in Animated GIFs”, Nov. 3-7, 2014 (4 pages).
Kim, Harry C., Notification of Transmittal of the International Search Report and the Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority, or the Declaration dated Sep. 16, 2020 for International Patent Application No. PCT/US2020/032999.
Kolosowski-Gager, Katherine, Final Office Action dated Feb. 11, 2019 for U.S. Appl. No. 14/627,151.
Kolosowski-Gager, Katherine, Non-Final Office Action dated Jun. 29, 2018 for U.S. Appl. No. 14/627,151.
Lithium Technologies. “Community Health Index for Online Communities.” 2009, https://www.lithium.com/pdfs/whitepapers/Lithium-Community-Health-Index_v1AY2ULb.pdf. Retrieved from the Internet Wayback Machine, dated Feb. 19, 2011.
Lithium Website, http://www.lithium.com, Dec. 11, 2010, retrieved from Internet Archive, pp. 1-9.
Liu et al., OAuth Based Authentication and Authorization in Open Telco API; International Conference on Computer Science and Electronics Engineering, 2012 (Year: 2012).
M2 PressWire, “Alterian: Social media monitoring and analytics comes of age with Alterian's acquisition of market leader Techrigy,” Jul. 15, 2009, Anonymous, Norman Media Ltd, London.
Matthews, Tara, et al. “Community Insights: Helping Community Leaders Enhance the Value of Enterprise Online Communities.” Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Apr. 27-May 2, 2013, Paris, France. ACM (2013). pp. 513-522.
Meng, Jau Shya, Non-Final Office Action dated Jan. 3, 2020 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/877,381.
Meng, Jau Shya, Non-Final Office Action dated Jun. 16, 2020 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/877,381.
Mesa, Joel, Final Office Action dated Mar. 30, 2020 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/782,635.
Mesa, Joel, Non-Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 15/782,635 dated Oct. 4, 2019.
Mesa, Joel, Non-Final Office Action dated Oct. 6, 2020 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/782,635.
Mosley, Kyle T., Non-Final Office Action dated Dec. 28, 2017 for U.S. Appl. No. 14/852,965.
Mosley, Kyle T., Non-Final Office Action dated Oct. 4, 2017 for U.S. Appl. No. 14/627,151.
Neizloff, Eric R., Non-Final Office Action dated Nov. 25, 2014 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/848,706.
Neizloff, Eric R., Non-Final Office Action dated Nov. 6, 2018 for U.S. Appl. No. 14/824,021.
Niruntasukrat et al., Authorization Mechanism for MQTT-based Internet of Things, IEEE ICC 2016 Workshops W07—Workshop on Convergent Internet of Things (Year: 2016).
Ofori-Awuah, Maame, Final Office Action dated Oct. 2, 2020 for U.S. Appl. No. 14/929,209.
Ofori-Awuah, Maame, Final Office Action dated Sep. 6, 2019 for U.S. Appl. No. 14/929,209.
Ofori-Awuah, Maame, Non-Final Office Action dated Apr. 5, 2019 for U.S. Appl. No. 14/929,209.
Oh, Eung Gie, Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority and International Search Report dated Nov. 18, 2014 for International Patent Application No. PCT/US2014/031345.
Olshannikov, Alex, Final Office Action dated Apr. 15, 2016 for U.S. Appl. No. 14/098,480.
Olshannikov, Alex, Final Office Action dated Feb. 17, 2016 for U.S. Appl. No. 14/098,509.
Olshannikov, Alex, Non-Final Office Action dated Nov. 5, 2015 for U.S. Appl. No. 14/098,480.
Olshannikov, Alex, Non-Final Office Action dated Oct. 22, 2015 for U.S. Appl. No. 14/098,509.
Perungavoor, Venkatanaray, Notice of Allowance and Fee(s) Due for U.S. Appl. No. 16/158,167, dated May 15, 2020.
Raju, “5 Ways to Tweet More Than 140 Characters,” Dec. 28, 2008, Technically Personal, http://www.techpp.com/2008/12/28/5-ways-to-tweet-more-than-140-characters/, retrieved from Internet Archive version from Mar. 3, 2011.
Rao et al., U.S. Appl. No. 62/049,642, filed Sep. 12, 2014 and entitled, “System and Apparatus for an Application Agnostic User Search Engine.”
Rashid, Ishrat, Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 15/782,653 dated Sep. 19, 2019.
Rashid, Ishrat, Non-Final Office Action dated Jun. 11, 2019 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/782,653.
Rashid, Ishrat, Non-Final Office Action dated Jun. 12, 2020 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/782,653.
Senftleber et al., International (PCT) Patent Application No. PCT/US2018/055545, filed Oct. 12, 2018 and entitled, “Predicting Performance of Content and Electronic Messages Among a System of Networked Computing Devices.”
Senftleber et al., U.S. Appl. No. 15/782,635, filed Oct. 12, 2017 and entitled, “Computerized Tools To Enhance Speed and Propagation of Content in Electronic Messages Among a System of Networked Computing Devices.”
Senftleber et al., U.S. Appl. No. 15/782,642, filed Oct. 12, 2017 and entitled, “Predicting Performance of Content and Electronic Messages Among a System of Networked Computing Devices.”
Senftleber et al., U.S. Appl. No. 15/782,653, filed Oct. 12, 2017 and entitled, “Optimizing Effectiveness of Content in Electronic Messages Among a System of Networked Computing Device.”
Senftleber et al., U.S. Appl. No. 16/158,167, filed Oct. 11, 2018 and entitled, “Credential and Authentication Management in Scalable Data Networks.”
Senftleber et al., U.S. Appl. No. 16/158,169, filed Oct. 11, 2018 and entitled, “Native Activity Tracking Using Credential and Authentication Management in Scalable Data Networks.”
Senftleber et al., U.S. Appl. No. 16/158,172, filed Oct. 11, 2018 and entitled, “Proxied Multifactorauthentication Using Credential and Authentication Management in Scalable Data Networks.”
Suh, Andrew, Non-Final Office Action dated Jul. 8, 2020 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/158,172.
Tabor, Amare F., Final Office Action dated Apr. 8, 2015 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/871,076.
Tabor, Amare F., Non-Final Office Action dated Aug. 15, 2014 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/871,076.
Takesue, Masaru, An HTTP Extension for Secure Transfer of Confidential Data, 2009 IEEE International Conference on Networking, Architecture, and Storage, Hunan, 2009, pp. 101-108, doi: 10.1109/NAS.2009.21.
Takesue, Masaru, An HTTP Extension for Secure Transfer of Confidential Data. IEEE, 2009 (Year: 2009).
Thomas, Shane, Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority and International Search Report dated Aug. 16, 2013 for International Patent Application No. PCT/US2013/037107.
Trapanese, William C., Non-Final Office Action dated May 27, 2020 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/413,577.
Vo, Huyen X., Non-Final Office Action dated Mar. 15, 2019 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/782,642.
Vo, Huyen X., Non-Final Office Action dated Oct. 15, 2020 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/458,183.
Walsh, John B., Non-Final Office Action dated Mar. 24, 2017 for U.S. Appl. No. 14/702,696.
Wang, Xiaoqing, and Shannon Lantzy. “A Systematic Examination of Member Turnover and Online Community Health.” Thirty Second International Conference on Information Systems, Shanghai (2011), pp. 1-11.
Wollenstein et al., U.S. Appl. No. 61/639,509, filed Apr. 27, 2012 and entitled, “Systems and Methods for Implementing Custom Privacy Settings.”
Wu, Michael, U.S. Appl. No. 61/734,927, filed Dec. 7, 2012 and entitled, “Systems and Methods for Presenting Analytic Data.”
Wu, Michael, U.S. Appl. No. 62/072,929, filed Oct. 30, 2014 and entitled, “Systems and Methods To Monitor Health of Online Social Communities.”
Young, Lee W., Notification of Transmittal of the International Search Report and the Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority, or the Declaration, dated Apr. 1, 2019 for International Application No. PCT/US2018/05545.
Young, Lee W., Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority and International Search Report dated May 28, 2014 for International Patent Application No. PCT/US2013/073625.
Young, Lee W.; Notification of Transmittal of the International Search Report and the Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority, or the Declaration dated Jun. 24, 2019 for International Application No. PCT/US2019/014637.
Goldberg, Ivan R., Final Office Action dated Jan. 15, 2015 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/865,429.
Goldberg, Ivan R., Non-Final Office Action dated Apr. 13, 2016 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/865,429.
Goldberg, Ivan R., Non-Final Office Action dated Jun. 18, 2014 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/835,250.
Goldberg, Ivan R., Non-Final Office Action dated Jun. 18, 2014 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/835,502.
Goldberg, Ivan R., Non-Final Office Action dated Jun. 20, 2014 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/865,411.
Goldberg, Ivan R., Non-Final Office Action dated Jun. 23, 2014 for U.S. Appl. No. 13/865,429.
Hardt, Dick, The OAuth 2.0 Authorization Framework draft-ieft-oauth-v2-31; Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) (Year: 2012).
Senftleber et al., U.S. Appl. No. 16/194,126, filed Nov. 16, 2018 and entitled, “Multiplexed Data Exchange Portal Interface in Scalable Data Networks.”
Shaw, Robert A., Non-Final Office Action dated Jan. 22, 2021 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/158,169.
Singh, Amardeep, IP Australia, Examination Report No. 1 for Australia Patent Application No. 2019209542 dated Dec. 17, 2020.
Spasojevic et al., U.S. Appl. No. 61/943,047, filed Feb. 21, 2014 and entitled, “Domain Generic Large Scale Topic Expertise & Interest Mining Across Multiple Online Social Networks.”
Spasojevic, Nemanja et al., “When-To-Post on Social Networks”, International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining (KDD), Aug. 10-13, 2015, pp. 2127-2136, Retrieved Online: http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?d=2788584.
Suh, Andrew, Final Office Action dated Dec. 3, 2020 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/158,172.
Wikipedia, “Dependency Hell”, published Jul. 26, 2004, Updated Oct. 14, 2020, Date Accessed: Nov. 25, 2020, <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dependency_hell> (Year: 2020).
Bendersky, Eli, “Benefits of Dependencies in Software Projects as a Function of Effort,” Eli Bendersky's Website, Published Jan. 13, 2017, Date Accessed: Nov. 25, 2020, <https://eli.thegreenplace.net/2017/benefits-of-dependencies-in-software-projects-as-a-function-of-effort/>.
NPM, “Dependency Hell”, New Project, Monday, Published 2016, Date Accessed: Nov. 25, 2020, <https://npm.github.io/how-npm-works-docs/theory-and-design/dependency-hell.html>.
Fia, Naya, Twitter Status, “Firefox's Dependency Graph”, Published Jun. 9, 2017, Date Accessed: Nov. 25, 2020, <https://twitter.com/nayafia/status/873294386934816768>.
Dolstra, Eleco, The Purely Functional Software Deployment Model, IPA Institute for Programming Research and Algorithmics, Utrecht University, Published Jan. 18, 2006, ISBN: 90-393-4130-3, 281 Pages, Date Accessed: Nov. 25, 2020 <https://edolstra.github.io/pubs/phd-thesis.pdf>.
European Patent Office, Extended European Search Report dated Nov. 12, 2021 for European Patent Application No. 19741372.7.
Fiorillo, James N., Final Office Action dated Sep. 27, 2021 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/827,625.
Fiorillo, James N., Notice of Allowance and Fee(s) Due dated Nov. 24, 2021 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/827,625.
Leimeister et al., “Success factors of virtual communities from the perspective of members and operators: An empirical study,” Proceedings of the 37th Hawaii International Conference on Systems Sciences 2004, IEEE, pp. 1-10 (Year: 2004).
Ofori-Awuah, Maame, Non-Final Office Action dated Sep. 28, 2021 for U.S. Appl. No. 14/929,209.
Rashid, Ishrat, Non-Final Office Action dated Dec. 22, 2021 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/782,653.
Shaw, Robert A., Non-Final Office Action dated Dec. 27, 2021 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/158,169.
Barua et al., “Protecting Web Browser Extensions from JavaScript Injection Attacks,” 2013 International Conference on Engineering of Complex Computer Systems, IEEE. (Year: 2013).
Birgisson et al., “Macaroons: Cookies with Contextual Caveats for Decentralized Authorization in the Cloud,” Network and Distributed System Security (NDSS) Symposium, Feb. 23-26, 2014, San Diego, California. (Year: 2014).
Dinh, Khanh Q., Non-Final Office Action dated Apr. 28, 2022 for U.S. Appl. No. 17/334,135.
Dinh, Khanh Q., Notice of Allowance and Fee(s) Due dated Jun. 29, 2022 for U.S. Appl. No. 17/334,135.
Kim, Harry, Notification of Transmittal of the International Search Report and the Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority, or the Declaration, dated Jan. 11, 2022 for International Application No. PCT/US2021/050979.
Louw et al., “Enhancing web browser security against malware extensions,” J Computing Virol (2008), Published Jan. 12, 2008, Springer-Verlag France. (Year: 2008).
Meng, Jau Shya, Non-Final Office Action dated Nov. 8, 2022 for U.S. Appl. No. 17/332,391.
Mesa, Joel, Non-Final Office Action dated Mar. 31, 2022 for U.S. Appl. No. 17/244,868.
Mesa, Joel, Notice of Allowance and Fee(s) Due dated Aug. 23, 2022 for U.S. Appl. No. 17/244,868.
Nano, Sargon N., Non-Final Office Action dated Mar. 21, 2022 for U.S. Appl. No. 17/365,222.
Nano, Sargon N., Notice of Allowance and Fee(s) Due dated Apr. 28, 2022 for U.S. Appl. No. 17/365,222.
Perungavoor, Venkat, Non-Final Office Action dated Jun. 29, 2022 for U.S. Appl. No. 17/027,646.
Perungavoor, Venkatanaray, Notice of Allowance and Fee(s) Due dated Oct. 27, 2022 for U.S. Appl. No. 17/086,260.
Perungavoor, Venkatanary, Non-Final Office Action dated Aug. 19, 2022 for U.S. Appl. No. 17/086,260.
Perungavoor, Venkatanary, Non-Final Office Action dated Jun. 29, 2022 for U.S. Appl. No. 17/086,260.
Rashid, Ishrat, Notice of Allowance and Fee(s) Due, dated Sep. 16, 2022 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/782,653.
Shaw, Robert A., Notice of Allowance and Fee(s) Due dated Jun. 2, 2022 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/158,169.
Shinjo et al., A Distributed Web Browser as a Platform for Running Collaborative Applications, International Conference on Collaborative Computing: Networking, Applications and Worksharing (CollaborateCom), Orlando, Florida, USA, Oct. 15-18, 2011 (Year: 2011).
Suh, Andrew, Non-Final Office Action dated Jul. 28, 2022 for U.S. Appl. No. 17/163,293.
Related Publications (1)
Number Date Country
20220156053 A1 May 2022 US