research-article

How to not get rich: an empirical study of donations in open source

Authors:

Cassandra Overney,

Christian Kästner,

Bogdan VasilescuAuthors Info & Claims

ICSE '20: Proceedings of the ACM/IEEE 42nd International Conference on Software Engineering

Pages 1209 - 1221

https://doi.org/10.1145/3377811.3380410

Published: 01 October 2020 Publication History

Abstract

Open source is ubiquitous and many projects act as critical infrastructure, yet funding and sustaining the whole ecosystem is challenging. While there are many different funding models for open source and concerted efforts through foundations, donation platforms like PayPal, Patreon, and OpenCollective are popular and low-bar platforms to raise funds for open-source development. With a mixed-method study, we investigate the emerging and largely unexplored phenomenon of donations in open source. Specifically, we quantify how commonly open-source projects ask for donations, statistically model characteristics of projects that ask for and receive donations, analyze for what the requested funds are needed and used, and assess whether the received donations achieve the intended outcomes. We find 25,885 projects asking for donations on GitHub, often to support engineering activities; however, we also find no clear evidence that donations influence the activity level of a project. In fact, we find that donations are used in a multitude of ways, raising new research questions about effective funding.

References

[1]

Heather Arthur. 2013. Being Ridiculed for My Open Source Project. https://harthur.wordpress.com/2013/01/24/771/Blogpost.

[2]

René Bekkers and Pamala Wiepking. 2011. A literature review of empirical studies of philanthropy: Eight mechanisms that drive charitable giving. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly 40, 5 (2011), 924--973.

[3]

Christopher Bogart, Christian Kästner, James Herbsleb, and Ferdian Thung. 2016. How to Break an API: Cost Negotiation and Community Values in Three Software Ecosystems. In Proc. Int'l Symposium Foundations of Software Engineering (FSE) (Seattle, WA). ACM Press, New York, 109--120. http://breakingapis.org

Digital Library

[4]

Simon Butler, Jonas Gamalielsson, Björn Lundell, Per Jonsson, Johan Sjöberg, Anders Mattsson, Niklas Rickö, Tomas Gustavsson, Jonas Feist, Stefan Landemoo, et al. 2018. An investigation of work practices used by companies making contributions to established OSS projects. In Proc. Int'l Conference on Software Engineering: Software Engineering in Practice Track (ICSE-SEIP). IEEE, 201--210.

Digital Library

[5]

Donald Thomas Campbell and Thomas D Cook. 1979. Quasi-experimentation: Design & analysis issues for field settings. Rand McNally College Publishing Company Chicago.

[6]

Brett Cannon. 2018. Setting expectations for open source participation. https://snarky.ca/setting-expectations-for-open-source-participation/ Blog post.

[7]

InduShobha Chengalur-Smith, Anna Sidorova, and Sherae Daniel. 2010. Sustainability of free/libre open source projects: A longitudinal study. Journal of the Association for Information Systems 11, 11 (2010), 657.

[8]

Looi Theam Choy. 2014. The strengths and weaknesses of research methodology: Comparison and complimentary between qualitative and quantitative approaches. IOSR Journal of Humanities and Social Science 19, 4 (2014), 99--104.

[9]

Jailton Coelho, Marco Tulio Valente, Luciana Lourdes Silva, and André Hora. 2018. Why we Engage in FLOSS: Answers from Core Developers. In Proc. Int'l Workshop on Cooperative and Human Aspects of Software Engineering (CHASE). IEEE, 114--121.

Digital Library

[10]

Jacob Cohen, Patricia Cohen, Stephen G West, and Leona S Aiken. 2013. Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences. Routledge.

[11]

Eleni Constantinou and Tom Mens. 2017. An empirical comparison of developer retention in the RubyGems and npm software ecosystems. Innovations in Systems and Software Engineering 13, 2--3 (2017), 101--115.

Digital Library

[12]

Kevin Crowston, Kangning Wei, James Howison, and Andrea Wiggins. 2012. Free/Libre open-source software development: What we know and what we do not know. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR) 44, 2 (2012), 7.

Digital Library

[13]

Laura Dabbish, Colleen Stuart, Jason Tsay, and Jim Herbsleb. 2012. Social Coding in GitHub: Transparency and Collaboration in an Open Software Repository. In Proc. Conf. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) (Seattle, Washington, USA). ACM Press, New York, 1277--1286.

Digital Library

[14]

Steve Easterbrook, Janice Singer, Margaret-Anne Storey, and Daniela Damian. 2008. Selecting empirical methods for software engineering research. In Guide to advanced empirical software engineering. Springer, 285--311.

[15]

Nadia Eghbal. 2016. Roads and Bridges: The Unseen Labor Behind Our Digital Infrastructure. Technical Report. Ford Foundation. Retrieved from https://www.fordfoundation.org/library/reports-and-studies/roads-and-bridges-the-unseen-labor-behind-our-digital-infrastructure/.

[16]

Nadia Eghbal. 2019. A handy guide to financial support for open source. https://github.com/nayafia/lemonade-stand. Accessed Aug 16, 2019.

[17]

Matthieu Foucault, Marc Palyart, Xavier Blanc, Gail C Murphy, and Jean-Rémy Falleri. 2015. Impact of developer turnover on quality in open-source software. In Proc. Int'l Symposium Foundations of Software Engineering (FSE). ACM, 829--841.

Digital Library

[18]

Linux Foundation. 2019. Community Health Analytics Open Source Software (CHAOSS). https://chaoss.community/

[19]

Egon Franck and Carola Jungwirth. 2003. Reconciling Rent-Seekers and Donators-The Governance Structure of Open Source. Journal of Management and Governance 7, 4 (2003), 401--421.

[20]

Bruno S Frey and Lorenz Götte. 1999. Does pay motivate volunteers? Working paper / Institute for Empirical Research in Economics 7 (1999).

[21]

Bruno S Frey and Reto Jegen. 2001. Motivation Crowding Theory. Journal of Economic Surveys 15, 5 (2001), 589--611.

[22]

Vahid Garousi, Michael Felderer, and Mika V. Mäntylä. 2016. The need for multivocal literature reviews in software engineering: complementing systematic literature reviews with grey literature. In Proc. Int'l Conf. Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering (EASE). ACM Press, New York.

[23]

Jeff Geerling. 2017. Don't drown in your open source project! https://www.jeffgeerling.com/blog/2017/dont-drown-your-open-source-projectBlogpost.

[24]

Andrew Gelman and Jennifer Hill. 2006. Data analysis using regression and multilevel/hierarchical models. Cambridge University Press.

[25]

Daniel German, Gregorio Robles, Germán Poo-Caamano, Xin Yang, Hajimu Iida, and Katsuro Inoue. 2018. Was My Contribution Fairly Reviewed? A Framework to Study the Perception of Fairness in Modern Code Reviews. In Proc. Int'l Conf. Software Engineering (ICSE). IEEE, 523--534.

[26]

Rishab A Ghosh, Ruediger Glott, Bernhard Krieger, and Gregorio Robles. 2002. Free/libre and open source software: Survey and study - Part 4: Survey of Developers. Technical Report. Int'l Institute of Informatics, University of Maastricht.

[27]

GitHub. 2017. Open Source Survey 2017. http://opensourcesurvey.org/2017/.

[28]

Georgios Gousios. 2013. The GHTorrent dataset and tool suite. In Proc. Int'l Conf. Mining Software Repositories (MSR). IEEE, 233--236.

[29]

Shane Greenstein and Frank Nagle. 2014. Digital Dark Matter and the Economic Contribution of Apache. Research Policy 43, 4 (2014), 623--631.

[30]

Stefan Haefliger, Georg Von Krogh, and Sebastian Spaeth. 2008. Code Reuse in Open Source Software. Management Science 54, 1 (2008), 180--193.

Digital Library

[31]

Eran Hammer. 2018. A New Social Contract for Open Source. https://hueniverse.com/86dlfcf3e353 Blog post.

[32]

David Heinemeier Hansson. 2013. The perils of mixing open source and money. http://david.heinemeierhansson.com/2013/the-perils-of-mixing-open-source-and-money.html Blog post.

[33]

Dirk Homscheid and Mario Schaarschmidt. 2016. Between Organization and Community: Investigating Turnover Intention Factors of Firm-sponsored Open Source Software Developers. In Proc. Conf. Web Science (WebSci) (Hannover, Germany). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 336--337.

Digital Library

[34]

Giuseppe Iaffaldano, Igor Steinmacher, Fabio Calefato, Marco Gerosa, and Filippo Lanubile. 2019. Why do developers take breaks from contributing to OSS projects? A preliminary analysis. Technical Report 1903.09528. arXiv.

[35]

Marco Iansiti and Roy Levien. 2004. The Keystone Advantage: What the New Dynamics of Business Ecosystems Mean for Strategy Innovation, and Sustainability. Harvard Business Press, Boston, MA.

[36]

Javier Luis Canovas Izquierdo and Jordi Cabot. 2018. The role of foundations in open source projects. In Proc. Int'l Conference on Software Engineering: Software Engineering in Society (ICSE-SEIS). ACM, 3--12.

Digital Library

[37]

Sandeep Krishnamurthy, Shaosong Ou, and Arvind K Tripathi. 2014. Acceptance of monetary rewards in open source software development. Research Policy 43, 4 (2014), 632--644.

[38]

Sandeep Krishnamurthy and Arvind K Tripathi. 2009. Monetary Donations to an Open Source Software Platform. Research Policy 38, 2 (2009), 404--414.

[39]

Karim Lakhani and Robert G Wolf. 2003. Why hackers do what they do: Understanding motivation and effort in free/open source software projects. Technical Report. MIT Sloan working paper.

[40]

Nolan Lawson. 2017. What it feels like to be an open-source maintainer. https://nolanlawson.com/2017/03/05/what-it-feels-like-to-be-an-open-source-maintainer/ Blog post.

[41]

M.M. Lehman. 1980. Programs, Life Cycles, and Laws of Software Evolution. Proc. IEEE 68, 9 (Sept 1980), 1060--1076.

[42]

Jan Lehnardt. 2015. Sustainable Open Source, https://writing.jan.io/2015/ll/20/sustainable-open-source.html Blog post.

[43]

Jan Lehnardt. 2017. Sustainable Open Source: The Maintainers Perspective or: How I Learned to Stop Caring and Love Open Source. https://writing.jan.io/2017/03/06/sustainable-open-source-the-maintainers-perspective-or-how-i-learned-to-stop-caring-and-love-open-source.html Blog post.

[44]

Josh Lerner and Jean Tirole. 2002. Some simple economics of open source. The Journal of Industrial Economics 50, 2 (2002), 197--234.

[45]

Pia Mancini et al. 2017. Sustain: A One Day Conversation for Open Source Software Sustainers - The Report. Technical Report. Sustain Conference Organization. https://sustainoss.org/2017-report/

[46]

Jennifer Marlow and Laura Dabbish. 2013. Activity Trace s and Signals in Software Developer Recruitment and Hiring. In Proc. Conf. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) (San Antonio, Texas, USA). ACM Press, New York, 145--156.

Digital Library

[47]

Jennifer Marlow, Laura Dabbish, and Jim Herbsleb. 2013. Impression Formation in Online Peer Production: Activity Traces and Personal Profiles in GitHub. In Proc. Conf. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) (San Antonio, Texas, USA). ACM Press, New York, 117--128.

Digital Library

[48]

Courtney Miller, David Widder, Christian Kästner, and Bogdan Vasilescu. 2019. Why Do People Give Up FLOSSing? A Study of Contributor Disengagement in Open Source. In Proc. IFIP Int'l Conf. Open Source Systems (OSS). Springer, 116--129.

[49]

Audris Mockus. 2007. Large-scale code reuse in open source software. In Int'l Workshop on Emerging Trends in FLOSS Research and Development (FLOSS). IEEE, 7--7.

[50]

Audris Mockus, Roy T. Fielding, and James D. Herbsleb. 2002. Two Case Studies of Open Source Software Development: Apache and Mozilla. ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. (TOSEM) 11, 3 (July 2002), 309--346.

Digital Library

[51]

Evgeny Morozov. 2013. The Meme Hustler. The Baffler 22 (4 2013).

[52]

Frank Nagle. 2018. Open source software and firm productivity. Management Science 65,3 (2018), 1191--1215.

Digital Library

[53]

Keitaro Nakasai, Hideaki Hata, and Kenichi Matsumoto. 2018. Are Donation Badges Appealing? A Case Study of Developer Responses to Eclipse Bug Reports. IEEE Software 36, 3 (2018), 22--27.

[54]

Keitaro Nakasai, Hideaki Hata, Saya Onoue, and Kenichi Matsumoto. 2017. Analysis of Donations in the Eclipse Project. In Proc. Int'l Workshop on Empirical Software Engineering in Practice (IWESEP). IEEE, 18--22.

[55]

Elinor Ostrom. 1990. Governing the commons: The evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge University Press.

[56]

Jagdish K Patel, CH Kapadia, and Donald Bruce Owen. 1976. Handbook of statistical distributions. M. Dekker.

[57]

Jane Ritchie, Jane Lewis, Carol McNaughton Nicholls, Rachel Ormston, et al. 2013. Qualitative research practice: A guide for social science students and researchers. Sage.

[58]

Jeffrey A Roberts, Il-Horn Hann, and Sandra A Slaughter. 2006. Understanding the motivations, participation, and performance of open source software developers: A longitudinal study of the Apache projects. Management Science 52, 7 (2006), 984--999.

Digital Library

[59]

Gregorio Robles and Jesus M Gonzalez-Barahona. 2006. Contributor turnover in libre software projects. In Proc. IFIP Int'l Conf. Open Source Systems. Springer, 273--286.

[60]

Peter J Rousseeuw and Christophe Croux. 1993. Alternatives to the median absolute deviation. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 88, 424 (1993), 1273--1283.

[61]

Wilmar B Schaufeli, Arnold B Bakker, Kees Hoogduin, Cas Schaap, and Afilla Kladler. 2001. On the clinical validity of the Maslach Burnout Inventory and the Burnout Measure. Psychology & Health 16, 5 (2001), 565--582.

[62]

Andreas Schilling, Sven Laumer, and Tim Weitzel. 2012. Who will remain? An evaluation of actual person-job and person-team fit to predict developer retention in FLOSS projects. In Proc. Hawaii Int'l Conf. System Sciences (HICSS). IEEE, 3446--3455.

Digital Library

[63]

Isaac Schlueter. 2015. Money and Open Source. https://medium.com/open-source-life/d44al953749c Blog post.

[64]

Sonali K Shah. 2006. Motivation, governance, and the viability of hybrid forms in open source software development. Management Science 52, 7 (2006), 1000--1014.

Digital Library

[65]

Zed Shaw, Adam Stacoviak, and Jerod Santo. 2018. The Changelog, Episode 300: Corporate interests in open source and dev culture. https://www.changelog.com/podcast/300 Podcast.

[66]

Peter Singer. 2015. The most good you can do: How effective altruism is changing ideas about living ethically. Yale University Press.

[67]

Manuel Sojer and Joachim Henkel. 2010. Code reuse in open source software development: Quantitative evidence, drivers, and impediments. Journal of the Association for Information Systems 11, 12 (2010), 868--901.

[68]

André Staitz. 2019. Software below the poverty line, https://staltz.com/software-below-the-poverty-line.html. Blog post.

[69]

Asher Trockman, Shurui Zhou, Christian Kästner, and Bogdan Vasilescu. 2018. Adding Sparkle to Social Coding: An Empirical Study of Repository Badges in the npm Ecosystem. In Proc. Int'l Conf. Software Engineering (ICSE). ACM, 511--522.

[70]

Rebecca Turner. 2017. npm, the npm github issue tracker, and you! https://blog.npmjs.org/post/161832149430/npm-the-npm-github-issue-tracker-and-you Blog post.

[71]

Marat Valiev, Bogdan Vasilescu, and James Herbsleb. 2018. Ecosystem-Level Determinants of Sustained Activity in Open-Source Projects: A Case Study of the PyPI Ecosystem. In Proc. Int'l Symposium Foundations of Software Engineering (FSE). ACM Press, 644--655.

Digital Library

[72]

Michael R Veall and Klaus F Zimmermann. 1996. Pseudo-R2 measures for some common limited dependent variable models. Journal of Economic Surveys 10, 3 (1996), 241--259.

[73]

Georg Von Krogh, Stefan Haefliger, Sebastian Spaeth, and Martin W Wallin. 2012. Carrots and rainbows: Motivation and social practice in open source software development. Mis Quarterly 36, 2 (2012), 649--676.

[74]

Georg Von Krogh and Eric Von Hippel. 2003. Special Issue on Open Source Software Development (Editorial). Research Policy 32 (2003), 1149--1157.

[75]

Joel West and Scott Gallagher. 2006. Challenges of Open Innovation: The Paradox of Firm Investment in Open-Source Software. R&D Management 36, 3 (2006), 319--331.

[76]

Tim Wood. 2016. moment().endOf('term'). https://medium.com/timrwood/moment-endof-term-522d8965689 Blog post.

[77]

Yiqing Yu, Alexander Benlian, and Thomas Hess. 2012. An empirical study of volunteer members' perceived turnover in open source software projects. In Proc. Hawaii Int'l Conf. System Sciences (HICSS). IEEE, 3396--3405.

Digital Library

[78]

Yangyang Zhao, Yuming Zhou, Alexander Serebrenik, Vladimir Filkov, and Bogdan Vasilescu. 2017. The Impact of Continuous Integration on Other Software Development Practices: A Large-Scale Empirical Study. In Proc. Int'l Conf. Automated Software Engineering (ASE). IEEE, 60--71.

[79]

Minghui Zhou, Audris Mockus, Xiujuan Ma, Lu Zhang, and Hong Mei. 2016. Inflow and Retention in OSS Communities with Commercial Involvement: A Case Study of Three Hybrid Projects. ACM Trans. Softw. Eng Methodol. (TOSEM) 25,2 (2016), 13.

Digital Library

[80]

Henry Zhu and Jeff Meyerson. 2018. Software Engineering Daily: Babel with Henry Zhu. https://softwareengineeringdaily.com/2018/06/21/babel-with-henry-zhu/ Podcast.

[81]

Devon Zuegel. 2019. Announcing GitHub Sponsors: a new way to contribute to open source. https://github.blog/2019-05-23-announcing-github-sponsors-a-new-way-to-contribute-to-open-source/. Accessed May 23, 2019.

Cited By

Schueller WWachs J(2024)Modeling interconnected social and technical risks in open source software ecosystemsCollective Intelligence10.1177/263391372412319123:1Online publication date: 1-Jan-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1177/26339137241231912
Zhang YQin MStol KZhou MLiu HRoychoudhury APaiva AAbreu RStorey M(2024)How Are Paid and Volunteer Open Source Developers Different? A Study of the Rust ProjectProceedings of the IEEE/ACM 46th International Conference on Software Engineering10.1145/3597503.3639197(1-13)Online publication date: 20-May-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3597503.3639197
Fan YXiao THata HTreude CMatsumoto KRoychoudhury APaiva AAbreu RStorey M(2024)"My GitHub Sponsors profile is live!" Investigating the Impact of Twitter/X Mentions on GitHub SponsorsProceedings of the IEEE/ACM 46th International Conference on Software Engineering10.1145/3597503.3639127(1-12)Online publication date: 20-May-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3597503.3639127
Show More Cited By

Recommendations

The creative assessment of rich ideas
C&C '13: Proceedings of the 9th ACM Conference on Creativity & Cognition

This paper addresses a new dimension in the evaluation of creative ideas. This is based on the observation that some ideas seem to trigger or lead to more ideas than other ideas. We study the principle of idea richness --the potential for ideas to ...
Get Rich with Bitcoin: Know everything about the currency of the future, and how to profit from it
Get in Line: Chapter 11 Restructuring in Crowded Bankruptcy Courts

Bankruptcy costs depend not only on the laws that govern financial distress but also on the ability of the court to rehabilitate distressed firms. This paper tests whether Chapter 11 restructuring outcomes are affected by time constraints in busy ...

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

ICSE '20: Proceedings of the ACM/IEEE 42nd International Conference on Software Engineering

June 2020

1640 pages

ISBN:9781450371216

DOI:10.1145/3377811

General Chairs:
Gregg Rothermel
North Carolina State University
,
Doo-Hwan Bae
KAIST, South Korea

Copyright © 2020 ACM.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

Sponsors

SIGSOFT: ACM Special Interest Group on Software Engineering

In-Cooperation

KIISE: Korean Institute of Information Scientists and Engineers
IEEE CS

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 01 October 2020

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Badges

Artifacts Evaluated & Reusable / v1.1

Qualifiers

Research-article

Conference

ICSE '20

Sponsor:

SIGSOFT

ICSE '20: 42nd International Conference on Software Engineering

June 27 - July 19, 2020

Seoul, South Korea

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 276 of 1,856 submissions, 15%

Upcoming Conference

ICSE 2025

2025 IEEE/ACM 46th International Conference on Software Engineering

April 26 - May 3, 2025

Ottawa , ON , Canada

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

22
Total Citations
View Citations
370
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)61
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)3

Reflects downloads up to 04 Sep 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Schueller WWachs J(2024)Modeling interconnected social and technical risks in open source software ecosystemsCollective Intelligence10.1177/263391372412319123:1Online publication date: 1-Jan-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1177/26339137241231912
Zhang YQin MStol KZhou MLiu HRoychoudhury APaiva AAbreu RStorey M(2024)How Are Paid and Volunteer Open Source Developers Different? A Study of the Rust ProjectProceedings of the IEEE/ACM 46th International Conference on Software Engineering10.1145/3597503.3639197(1-13)Online publication date: 20-May-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3597503.3639197
Fan YXiao THata HTreude CMatsumoto KRoychoudhury APaiva AAbreu RStorey M(2024)"My GitHub Sponsors profile is live!" Investigating the Impact of Twitter/X Mentions on GitHub SponsorsProceedings of the IEEE/ACM 46th International Conference on Software Engineering10.1145/3597503.3639127(1-12)Online publication date: 20-May-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3597503.3639127
Fang HHerbsleb JVasilescu BRoychoudhury APaiva AAbreu RStorey M(2024)Novelty Begets Popularity, But Curbs Participation - A Macroscopic View of the Python Open-Source EcosystemProceedings of the IEEE/ACM 46th International Conference on Software Engineering10.1145/3597503.3608142(1-11)Online publication date: 20-May-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3597503.3608142
Yang LGeng HZhang YZhou M(2024)Open Source Ecosystem in New Era: Pattern and TrendChina’s e-Science Blue Book 202310.1007/978-981-99-8270-7_11(215-234)Online publication date: 24-Mar-2024
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-8270-7_11
Medappa PTunc MLi X(2023)Sponsorship Funding in Open-Source Software: Incentivize or Crowd-Out Motivations to Create, Maintain and Share?SSRN Electronic Journal10.2139/ssrn.4484403Online publication date: 2023
https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4484403
Wachs J(2023)Digital traces of brain drain: developers during the Russian invasion of UkraineEPJ Data Science10.1140/epjds/s13688-023-00389-312:1Online publication date: 15-May-2023
https://doi.org/10.1140/epjds/s13688-023-00389-3
Li ZYu YWang TLei YWang YWang H(2023)To Follow or Not to Follow: Understanding Issue/Pull-Request Templates on GitHubIEEE Transactions on Software Engineering10.1109/TSE.2022.322405349:4(2530-2544)Online publication date: 1-Apr-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1109/TSE.2022.3224053
Zhang XYu YGousios GRastogi A(2023)Pull Request Decisions Explained: An Empirical OverviewIEEE Transactions on Software Engineering10.1109/TSE.2022.316505649:2(849-871)Online publication date: 1-Feb-2023
https://doi.org/10.1109/TSE.2022.3165056
Linåker JPapatheocharous EOlsson T(2022)How to characterize the health of an Open Source Software project? A snowball literature review of an emerging practiceProceedings of the 18th International Symposium on Open Collaboration10.1145/3555051.3555067(1-12)Online publication date: 7-Sep-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3555051.3555067
Show More Cited By

View Options

Get Access

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Table of Contents