Open source software peer review practices: a case study of the apache server
Proceedings of the 30th international conference on Software engineering
Proceedings of the 2008 international working conference on Mining software repositories
The role of patch review in software evolution: an analysis of the mozilla firefox
Proceedings of the joint international and annual ERCIM workshops on Principles of software evolution (IWPSE) and software evolution (Evol) workshops
Understanding broadcast based peer review on open source software projects
Proceedings of the 33rd International Conference on Software Engineering
Improving open source software patch contribution process: methods and tools
Proceedings of the 33rd International Conference on Software Engineering
Do crosscutting concerns cause modularity problems?
Proceedings of the ACM SIGSOFT 20th International Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering
Peer code review in open source communitiesusing reviewboard
Proceedings of the ACM 4th annual workshop on Evaluation and usability of programming languages and tools
Informing development decisions: from data to information
Proceedings of the 2013 International Conference on Software Engineering
Convergent contemporary software peer review practices
Proceedings of the 2013 9th Joint Meeting on Foundations of Software Engineering
Key factors for adopting inner source
ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology (TOSEM)
| Hi-index | 0.00 |
In spite of the overwhelming success of Free/Open Source Software (F/OSS) like Apache and GNU/Linux, there is a limited understanding of the processes and methodologies that specify this form of software development. In this paper, we examine the process of patch reviews as a proxy for the extent of code-review in F/OSS projects. While existing descriptions of patch review processes are mostly narrative and based on individual experiences, we systematically analyze the email archives of five F/OSS projects to characterize this process. While doing so, we make a distinction between contributions (patches or review comments) by core members and casual contributors to grasp the role of core members in this process. Our results show that while the patch review processes are not exactly identical across various F/OSS projects, the core members across all projects play the vital role of gate-keepers to ensure a high level of review for submitted patches.