Towards a portfolio of FLOSS project success measures

Crowston, Kevin; Annabi, Hala; Howison, James; Masango, Chengetai

doi:10.1049/ic:20040261

Cited by 55 publications

(43 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Gaim has emerged as a more effective project, based on Crowston et al's multivariate measure of effectiveness in FLOSS contexts [3]. Evidence of Gaim's success can also be seen in that the project is still on-going, while Fire ceased active development in early 2007.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Group Maintenance Behaviors of Core and Peripherial Members of Free/Libre Open Source Software Teams

Scialdone

Heckman

et al. 2009

IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Group Maintenance is pro-social, discretionary, and relation-building behavior that occurs between members of groups in order to maintain reciprocal trust and cooperation. This paper considers how Free/libre Open Source Software (FLOSS) teams demonstrate such behaviors within the context of email, as this is the primary medium through which such teams communicate. We compare group maintenance behaviors between both core and peripheral members of these groups, as well as behaviors between a group that remains producing software today and one which has since dissolved. Our findings indicate that negative politeness tactics (those which show respect for the autonomy of others) may be the most instrumental group maintenance behaviors that contribute to a FLOSS group's ability to survive and continue software production.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Group Maintenance Behaviors of Core and Peripherial Members of Free/Libre Open Source Software Teams

Scialdone

Heckman

et al. 2009

IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A literature review has demonstrated that there is a wide range of measures of project success. The field has not settled on any one measure, or a matrix of measures (Crowston, Annabi, Howison, & Masango, 2005). Some of the possible measures include: lines of code per programmer per year (Mockus et al, 2000), speed in closing bugs or trackers items (Stewart & Gosian, 2006), or modularity of source code (Shaikh and Cornford, 2003).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding the Role of Core Developers in Open Source Development

Long¹

2006

JIITO

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Most Open Source Software projects fail, while only very few succeed. In this study, we examine the factors that may influence the success or failure of OSS projects. We particularly focus on OSS core developer roles. We separate core developers from other developers in the community and empirically examine their different roles. Based on our analysis of a data set comprising 300 open source projects, we demonstrate that both core-developer leadership and project-advocating activities are crucial in the development of OSS projects. This research also offers insight into the sustainability of OSS development and provides advice to practitioners in the OSS community on how to make their projects successful.

show abstract

“…Consequently, how to mitigate the productivity impact of distributed work has become a key concern in methods literature FLOSSD differs from traditional software engineering in its transparency (Scacchi et al 2006), lack of formal SDMs, PMFs, budgets, schedules or rule structures (Scacchi 2007;Scacchi et al 2006), developer self-assignment of tasks (Crowston et al 2007) and success measures (Crowston et al 2004;Crowston et al 2006). For example, Crowston et al (2006) FLOSSD projects are organized into layers -a small group of core developers, a larger group of ad hoc developers who make minor changes and bug fixes and an even larger group who report problems (Mockus et al 2002).…”

Section: The Scope Of the Design Agentmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Sensemaking-Coevolution-Implementation Theory of software design

Ralph

2015

Science of Computer Programming

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Understanding software design practice is critical to understanding modern information systems development. New developments in empirical software engineering, information systems design science and the interdisciplinary design literature combined with recent advances in process theory and testability have created a situation ripe for innovation. Consequently, this paper utilizes these breakthroughs to formulate a process theory of software design practice: SensemakingCoevolution-Implementation Theory explains how complex software systems are created by collocated software development teams in organizations. It posits that an independent agent (design team) creates a software system by alternating between three activities: organizing their perceptions about the context, mutually refining their understandings of the context and design space, and manifesting their understanding of the design space in a technological artifact. This theory development paper defines and illustrates Sensemaking-Coevolution-Implementation Theory, grounds its concepts and relationships in existing literature, conceptually evaluates the theory and situates it in the broader context of information systems development.

show abstract

Towards a portfolio of FLOSS project success measures

Cited by 55 publications

References 5 publications

Group Maintenance Behaviors of Core and Peripherial Members of Free/Libre Open Source Software Teams

Group Maintenance Behaviors of Core and Peripherial Members of Free/Libre Open Source Software Teams

Understanding the Role of Core Developers in Open Source Development

The Sensemaking-Coevolution-Implementation Theory of software design

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About