The Cathedral and the Bazaar
Toward an understanding of the motivation Open Source Software developers
Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Software Engineering
Algorithms for estimating relative importance in networks
Proceedings of the ninth ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining
Mining Version Histories to Guide Software Changes
Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on Software Engineering
Mining sequences of changed-files from version histories
Proceedings of the 2006 international workshop on Mining software repositories
Journal of Software Maintenance and Evolution: Research and Practice
Predicting defects using network analysis on dependency graphs
Proceedings of the 30th international conference on Software engineering
Expertise identification and visualization from CVS
Proceedings of the 2008 international working conference on Mining software repositories
Can developer-module networks predict failures?
Proceedings of the 16th ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Foundations of software engineering
Predicting failures with developer networks and social network analysis
Proceedings of the 16th ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Foundations of software engineering
Proceedings of the 4th India Software Engineering Conference
Mining and visualizing developer networks from version control systems
Proceedings of the 4th International Workshop on Cooperative and Human Aspects of Software Engineering
Apache commits: social network dataset
Proceedings of the 10th Working Conference on Mining Software Repositories
Hi-index | 0.00 |
Since code revisions reflect the extent of human involvement in the software development process, revision histories reveal the interactions and interfaces between developers and modules.We therefore divide developers and modules into groups according to the revision histories of the open source software repository, for example, sourceforge.net. To describe the interactions in the open source development process, we use a representative model, Legitimate Peripheral Participation (LPP) [6], to divide developers into groups such as core and peripheral teams, based on the evolutionary process of learning behavior.With the conventional module relationship, we divide modules into kernel and non-kernel types (such as UI). In the past, groups of developers and modules have been partitioned naturally with informal criteria. In this work, however, we propose a developer-module relationship model to analyze the grouping structures between developers and modules. Our results show some process cases of relative importance on the constructed graph of project development. The graph reveals certain subtle relationships in the interactions between core and non-core team developers, and the interfaces between kernel and non-kernel modules.