Are One-Time Contributors Different? A Comparison to Core and Periphery Developers in FLOSS Repositories

Amanda Lee, Jeffrey C. Carver
{"title":"Are One-Time Contributors Different? A Comparison to Core and Periphery Developers in FLOSS Repositories","authors":"Amanda Lee, Jeffrey C. Carver","doi":"10.1109/ESEM.2017.7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Context: Free/Libre Open Source Software (FLOSS) communities consist of different types of contributors. Core contributors and peripheral contributors work together to create a successful project, each playing a different role. One-Time Contributors (OTCs), who are on the very fringe of the peripheral developers, are largely unstudied despite offering unique insights into the development process. In a prior survey, we identified OTCs and discovered their motivations and barriers. Aims: The objective of this study is to corroborate the survey results and provide a better understand of OTCs. We compare OTCs to other peripheral and core contributors to determine whether they are distinct. Method: We mined data from the same code-review repository used to identify survey respondents in our previous study. After identifying each contributor as core, periphery, or OTC, we compared them in terms of patch size, time interval from submission to decision, the nature of their conversations, and patch acceptance rates. Results: We identified a continuum between core developers and OTCs. OTCs create smaller patches, face longer time intervals between patch submission and rejection, have longer review conversations, and face lower patch acceptance rates. Conversely, core contributors create larger patches, face shorter time intervals for feedback, have shorter review conversations, and have patches accepted at the highest rate. The peripheral developers fall in between the OTCs and the core contributors. Conclusion: OTCs do, in fact, face the barriers identified in our prior survey. They represent a distinct group of contributors compared to core and peripheral developers.","PeriodicalId":213866,"journal":{"name":"2017 ACM/IEEE International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement (ESEM)","volume":"2 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-11-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"29","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2017 ACM/IEEE International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement (ESEM)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ESEM.2017.7","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 29

Abstract

Context: Free/Libre Open Source Software (FLOSS) communities consist of different types of contributors. Core contributors and peripheral contributors work together to create a successful project, each playing a different role. One-Time Contributors (OTCs), who are on the very fringe of the peripheral developers, are largely unstudied despite offering unique insights into the development process. In a prior survey, we identified OTCs and discovered their motivations and barriers. Aims: The objective of this study is to corroborate the survey results and provide a better understand of OTCs. We compare OTCs to other peripheral and core contributors to determine whether they are distinct. Method: We mined data from the same code-review repository used to identify survey respondents in our previous study. After identifying each contributor as core, periphery, or OTC, we compared them in terms of patch size, time interval from submission to decision, the nature of their conversations, and patch acceptance rates. Results: We identified a continuum between core developers and OTCs. OTCs create smaller patches, face longer time intervals between patch submission and rejection, have longer review conversations, and face lower patch acceptance rates. Conversely, core contributors create larger patches, face shorter time intervals for feedback, have shorter review conversations, and have patches accepted at the highest rate. The peripheral developers fall in between the OTCs and the core contributors. Conclusion: OTCs do, in fact, face the barriers identified in our prior survey. They represent a distinct group of contributors compared to core and peripheral developers.
一次性贡献者不同吗?FLOSS存储库中核心和外围开发人员的比较
背景:自由/自由开源软件(FLOSS)社区由不同类型的贡献者组成。核心贡献者和外围贡献者一起工作来创建一个成功的项目,每个人都扮演着不同的角色。一次性贡献者(otc)处于外围开发人员的边缘,尽管他们对开发过程提供了独特的见解,但他们在很大程度上没有被研究过。在之前的调查中,我们确定了otc,并发现了他们的动机和障碍。目的:本研究的目的是证实调查结果,并提供更好的了解otc。我们将otc与其他外围和核心贡献者进行比较,以确定它们是否不同。方法:我们从相同的代码审查存储库中挖掘数据,该存储库用于在我们之前的研究中识别调查回答者。在将每个贡献者确定为核心,外围或OTC之后,我们根据补丁大小,从提交到决定的时间间隔,他们对话的性质以及补丁接受率对他们进行比较。结果:我们确定了核心开发者和otc之间的连续性。otc创建较小的补丁,面临更长的补丁提交和拒绝之间的时间间隔,有更长的审查对话,并且面临更低的补丁接受率。相反,核心贡献者创建更大的补丁,面对更短的反馈时间间隔,更短的审查对话,并以最高的率接受补丁。外围开发人员介于otc和核心贡献者之间。结论:事实上,otc确实面临着我们之前调查中发现的障碍。与核心和外围开发人员相比,他们代表了一组不同的贡献者。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信