Jason Tsay
James Herbsleb
ABSTRACT
Open source software projects often rely on code contributions from a wide variety of developers to extend the capabilities of their software. Project members evaluate these contributions and often engage in extended discussions to decide whether to integrate changes. These discussions have important implications for project management regarding new contributors and evolution of project requirements and direction. We present a study of how developers in open work environments evaluate and discuss pull requests, a primary method of contribution in GitHub, analyzing a sample of extended discussions around pull requests and interviews with GitHub developers. We found that developers raised issues around contributions over both the appropriateness of the problem that the submitter attempted to solve and the correctness of the implemented solution. Both core project members and third-party stakeholders discussed and sometimes implemented alternative solutions to address these issues. Different stakeholders also influenced the outcome of the evaluation by eliciting support from different communities such as dependent projects or even companies. We also found that evaluation outcomes may be more complex than simply acceptance or rejection. In some cases, although a submitter's contribution was rejected, the core team fulfilled the submitter's technical goals by implementing an alternative solution. We found that the level of a submitter's prior interaction on a project changed how politely developers discussed the contribution and the nature of proposed alternative solutions.
- 10 Million Repositories - GitHub: https://github.com/blog/1724-10-million-repositories.Google Scholar
- Bryant, S.L., Forte, A. and Bruckman, A. 2005. Becoming Wikipedian: transformation of participation in a collaborative online encyclopedia. Proceedings of the 2005 international ACM SIGGROUP conference on Supporting group work (New York, NY, USA, 2005), 1– 10. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Burke, M. and Kraut, R. 2008. Mind Your Ps and Qs: The Impact of Politeness and Rudeness in Online Communities. Proceedings of the 2008 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (New York, NY, USA, 2008), 281–284. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Corbin, J. and Strauss, A. 2008. Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Sage.Google Scholar
- Crowston, K., Wei, K., Howison, J. and Wiggins, A. 2008. Free/Libre open-source software development: What we know and what we do not know. ACM Comput. Surv. 44, 2 (Mar. 2008), 7:1–7:35. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Dabbish, L., Stuart, C., Tsay, J. and Herbsleb, J. 2012. Social coding in GitHub: transparency and collaboration in an open software repository. Proceedings of the ACM 2012 conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (New York, NY, USA, 2012), 1277–1286. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Ducheneaut, N. 2005. Socialization in an Open Source Software Community: A Socio-Technical Analysis. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW). 14, 4 (2005), 323–368. Google ScholarDigital Library
- GitHub: http://github.com. Accessed: 2013-08-21.Google Scholar
- Gousios, G., Pinzger, M. and Deursen, A. van 2014. An Exploratory Study of the Pull-based Software Development Model. Proceedings of the 36th International Conference on Software Engineering (New York, NY, USA, 2014), 345–355. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Halfaker, A., Kittur, A. and Riedl, J. 2011. Don’t Bite the Newbies: How Reverts Affect the Quantity and Quality of Wikipedia Work. Proceedings of the 7th International Symposium on Wikis and Open Collaboration (New York, NY, USA, 2011), 163–172. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Ko, A.J. and Chilana, P.K. 2011. Design, Discussion, and Dissent in Open Bug Reports. Proceedings of the 2011 iConference (New York, NY, USA, 2011), 106–113. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Kraut, R.E. and Resnick, P. 2012. Building Successful Online Communities: Evidence-Based Social Design. MIT Press. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Von Krogh, G., Spaeth, S. and Lakhani, K.R. 2003. Community, joining, and specialization in open source software innovation: a case study. Research Policy. 32, 7 (Jul. 2003), 1217–1241.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Lerner, J. and Tirole, J. 2002. Some Simple Economics of Open Source. The Journal of Industrial Economics. 50, 2 (2002), 197–234.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Marlow, J., Dabbish, L. and Herbsleb, J. 2013. Impression formation in online peer production: activity traces and personal profiles in github. Proceedings of the 2013 conference on Computer supported cooperative work (New York, NY, USA, 2013), 117–128. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Mockus, A., Fielding, R.T. and Herbsleb, J.D. 2002. Two case studies of open source software development: Apache and Mozilla. ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. 11, 3 (Jul. 2002), 309–346. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Rigby, P.C., German, D.M. and Storey, M.-A. 2008. Open source software peer review practices: a case study of the apache server. Proceedings of the 30th international conference on Software engineering (2008), 541–550. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Scacchi, W. 2004. Free and open source development practices in the game community. Software, IEEE. 21, 1 (2004), 59–66. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Scacchi, W. 2007. Free/Open Source Software Development: Recent Research Results and Methods. Architectural Issues. M. V Zelkowitz, ed. Elsevier. 243– 295.Google Scholar
- Scacchi, W. 2002. Understanding the requirements for developing open source software systems. Software, IEE Proceedings- (2002), 24–39.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Strauss, A.L., Corbin, J. and others 1990. Basics of qualitative research. Sage Newbury Park, CA.Google Scholar
- Teasley, S., Covi, L., Krishnan, M.S. and Olson, J.S. 2000. How Does Radical Collocation Help a Team Succeed? Proceedings of the 2000 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (New York, NY, USA, 2000), 339–346. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Tsay, J., Dabbish, L. and Herbsleb, J. 2014. Influence of Social and Technical Factors for Evaluating Contribution in GitHub. Proceedings of the 36th international conference on Software engineering (2014), In preparation. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Viégas, F.B., Wattenberg, M. and Dave, K. 2004. Studying Cooperation and Conflict Between Authors with History Flow Visualizations. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (New York, NY, USA, 2004), 575–582. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Van Wendel de Joode, R. 2004. Managing conflicts in open source communities. Electronic Markets. 14, 2 (2004), 104–113.Google ScholarCross Ref
Index Terms
- Let's talk about it: evaluating contributions through discussion in GitHub
Recommendations
Gender and Tenure Diversity in GitHub Teams
CHI '15: Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing SystemsSoftware development is usually a collaborative venture. Open Source Software (OSS) projects are no exception; indeed, by design, the OSS approach can accommodate teams that are more open, geographically distributed, and dynamic than commercial teams. ...
Influence of social and technical factors for evaluating contribution in GitHub
ICSE 2014: Proceedings of the 36th International Conference on Software EngineeringOpen source software is commonly portrayed as a meritocracy, where decisions are based solely on their technical merit. However, literature on open source suggests a complex social structure underlying the meritocracy. Social work environments such as ...
Newcomer OSS-Candidates: Characterizing Contributions of Novice Developers to GitHub
AbstractThe ability of an Open Source Software (OSS) project to attract, onboard, and retain any newcomer is vital to its livelihood. Although, evidence suggests an upsurge in novice developers joining social coding platforms (such as GitHub), the extent ...
Comments