@article {Beecher2009739, title = {Identifying exogenous drivers and evolutionary stages in FLOSS projects}, journal = {Journal of Systems and Software}, volume = {82}, number = {5}, year = {2009}, pages = {739 - 750}, abstract = {The success of a Free/Libre/Open Source Software (FLOSS) project has been evaluated in the past through the number of commits made to its configuration management system, number of developers and number of users. Most studies, based on a popular FLOSS repository (SourceForge), have concluded that the vast majority of projects are failures. This study{\textquoteright}s empirical results confirm and expand conclusions from an earlier and more limited work. Not only do projects from different repositories display different process and product characteristics, but a more general pattern can be observed. Projects may be considered as early inceptors in highly visible repositories, or as established projects within desktop-wide projects, or finally as structured parts of FLOSS distributions. These three possibilities are formalized into a framework of transitions between repositories. The framework developed here provides a wider context in which results from FLOSS repository mining can be more effectively presented. Researchers can draw different conclusions based on the overall characteristics studied about an Open Source software project{\textquoteright}s potential for success, depending on the repository that they mine. These results also provide guidance to OSS developers when choosing where to host their project and how to distribute it to maximize its evolutionary success.}, keywords = {developers, forge, forges, repositories, repository, scm, software repositories, sourceforge, success, users}, issn = {0164-1212}, doi = {DOI: 10.1016/j.jss.2008.10.026}, url = {http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6V0N-4TVTJFS-1/2/e32ecee1bcb54bd4a5dff6d5e3daca8d}, author = {Karl Beecher and Capiluppi, Andrea and Boldyreff, Cornelia} } @article {Capiluppi200989, title = {Quality Factors and Coding Standards - a Comparison Between Open Source Forges}, journal = {Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science}, volume = {233}, year = {2009}, note = {Proceedings of the International Workshop on Software Quality and Maintainability (SQM 2008)}, pages = {89 - 103}, abstract = {Enforcing adherence to standards in software development in order to produce high quality software artefacts has long been recognised as best practice in traditional software engineering. In a distributed heterogeneous development environment such those found within the Open Source paradigm, coding standards are informally shared and adhered to by communities of loosely coupled developers. Following these standards could potentially lead to higher quality software. This paper reports on the empirical analysis of two major forges where OSS projects are hosted. The first one, the KDE forge, provides a set of guidelines and coding standards in the form of a coding style that developers may conform to when producing the code source artefacts. The second studied forge, SourceForge, imposes no formal coding standards on developers. A sample of projects from these two forges has been analysed to detect whether the SourceForge sample, where no coding standards are reinforced, has a lower quality than the sample from KDE. Results from this analysis form a complex picture; visually, all the selected metrics show a clear divide between the two forges, but from the statistical standpoint, clear distinctions cannot be drawn amongst these quality related measures in the two forge samples.}, keywords = {artefacts, artifacts, coding standards, coding style, complexity, forge, forges, kde, metrics, quality, source code, sourceforge}, issn = {1571-0661}, doi = {DOI: 10.1016/j.entcs.2009.02.063}, url = {http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B75H1-4VXDKRV-7/2/abcc2be2c4c3998e4bc9b53473ca2d81}, author = {Capiluppi, Andrea and Boldyreff, Cornelia and Karl Beecher and Paul J. Adams} }