With over 10 million git repositories, GitHub is becoming one of the most important source of software artifacts on the Internet. Researchers are starting to mine the information stored in GitHub's event logs, trying to understand how its users employ the site to collaborate on software. However, so far there have been no studies describing the quality and properties of the data available from GitHub. We document the results of an empirical study aimed at understanding the characteristics of the repositories in GitHub and how users take advantage of GitHub's main featuresnamely commits, pull requests, and issues. Our results indicate that, while GitHub is a rich source of data on software development, mining GitHub for research purposes should take various potential perils into consideration. We show, for example, that the majority of the projects are personal and inactive; that GitHub is also being used for free storage and as a Web hosting service; and that almost 40% of all pull requests do not appear as merged, even though they were. We provide a set of recommendations for software engineering researchers on how to approach the data in GitHub.

No abstract

No abstract

Researchers are currently drawn to study projects hosted on GitHub due to its popularity, ease of obtaining data, and its distinctive built-in social features. GitHub has been found to create a transparent development environment, which together with a pull request-based workflow, provides a lightweight mechanism for committing, reviewing and managing code changes. These features impact how GitHub is used and the benefits it provides to teams' development and collaboration. While most of the evidence we have is from GitHub's use in open source software (OSS) projects, GitHub is also used in an increasing number of commercial projects. It is unknown how GitHub supports these projects given that GitHub's workflow model does not intuitively fit the commercial development way of working. In this paper, we report findings from an online survey and interviews with GitHub users on how GitHub is used for collaboration in commercial projects. We found that many commercial projects adopted practices that are more typical of OSS projects including reduced communication, more independent work, and self-organization. We discuss how GitHub's transparency and popular workflow can promote open collaboration, allowing organizations to increase code reuse and promote knowledge sharing across their teams.

Software startups are typically under extreme pressure to get to market quickly with limited resources and high uncertainty. This pressure and uncertainty is likely to cause startups to accumulate technical debt as they make decisions that are more focused on the short-term than the long-term health of the codebase. However, most research on technical debt has been focused on more mature software teams, who may have less pressure and, therefore, reason about technical debt very differently than software startups. In this study, we seek to understand the organizational factors that lead to and the benefits and challenges associated with the intentional accumulation of technical debt in software startups. We interviewed 16 professionals involved in seven different software startups. We find that the startup phase, the experience of the developers, software knowledge of the founders, and level of employee growth are some of the organizational factors that influence the intentional accumulation of technical debt. In addition, we find the software startups are typically driven to achieve a "good enough level," and this guides the amount of technical debt that they intentionally accumulate to balance the benefits of speed to market and reduced resources with the challenges of later addressing technical debt.

Context: The ability to follow other users and projects on GitHub has introduced a new layer of open source software development participants who observe but do not contribute to projects. It has not been fully explored how following others influences the actions of GitHub users. Objective: This papers studies the motivation behind following (or not following) others and the influence of popular users on their followers. Method: A mixed methods research approach was used including a survey of 800 GitHub users to uncover the reasons for following on GitHub and a complementary quantitative analysis of the activity of GitHub users to examine influence. Our quantitative analysis studied 199 popular (most followed) users and their followers. Results: We found that popular users do influence their followers by guiding them to new projects. As a user's popularity increases, so does their rate of influence, yet the same is not true for a popular user's rate of contribution. Conclusions: These results indicate that a new type of leadership is emerging through GitHub's following feature and popularity can be more important than contribution in influencing others. We discuss implications of popularity and influence and their impact on social structure and leadership on OSS projects.

Software engineering practice has shifted from the development of products in closed environments toward more open and collaborative efforts. Software development has become significantly interdependent with other systems (e.g. services, apps) and typically takes place within large ecosystems of networked communities of stakeholder organizations. Such software ecosystems promise increased innovation power and support for consumer-oriented software services at scale and are characterized by a certain openness of their information flows. While such openness supports project and reputation management, it also brings requirements engineering-related challenges within the ecosystem, such as managing dynamic, emergent contributions from the ecosystem stakeholders, as well as collecting their input while protecting their IP. In this paper, we report from a study of requirements communication and management practices within IBM Ò 's Collaborative Lifecycle Management Ò product development ecosystem. Our research used

Scrum, the most popular agile method and project management framework, is widely reported to be used, adapted, misused, and abused in practice. However, not much is known about how Scrum actually works in practice, and critically, where, when, how and why it diverges from Scrum by the book. Through a Grounded Theory study involving semi-structured interviews of 45 participants from 30 companies and observations of five teams, we present our findings on how Scrum works in practice as compared to how it is presented in its formative books. We identify significant variations in these practices such as work breakdown, estimation, prioritization, assignment, the associated roles and artefacts, and discuss the underlying rationales driving the variations. Critically, we claim that not all variations are process misuse/abuse and propose a nuanced classification approach to understanding variations as standard, necessary, contextual, and clear deviations for successful Scrum use and adaptation.