@article {1237,
	title = {Bridging the Gap between Agile and Free Software Approaches},
	journal = {International Journal of Open Source Software and Processes},
	volume = {1},
	year = {2009},
	month = {31/2009},
	pages = {58 - 71},
	abstract = {Agile sprints are short events where a small team collocates in order to work on particular aspects of the overall project for a short period of time. Sprinting is a process that has been observed also in Free Software projects: these two paradigms, sharing common principles and values have shown several commonalities of practice. This article evaluates the impact of sprinting on a Free Software project through the analysis of code repository logs: sprints from two Free Software projects (Plone and KDE PIM) are assessed and two hypotheses are formulated: do sprints increase productivity? Are Free Software projects more productive after sprints compared with before? The primary contribution of this article is to show how sprinting creates a large increase in productivity both during the event, and immediately after the event itself: this argues for more in-depth studies focussing on the nature of sprinting.},
	keywords = {agile, kde, lines of code, loc, plone, productivity, scm, scrum, sprints, subversion},
	issn = {1942-3934},
	doi = {10.4018/jossp.2009010104},
	author = {Paul J. Adams and Capiluppi, Andrea}
}
@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}
}
@conference {SGKL09,
	title = {Evaluating the Quality of Open Source Software},
	booktitle = {Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science},
	volume = {233},
	year = {2008},
	note = {"the software source code and the associated data stored in the version control system, the bug tracking databases, the mailing lists, and the wikis allow us to evaluate quality in a transparent way"
"The data collection system collects the raw data from open source projects"
Mailing lists are measured in: Number of unique subscribers, Number of messages in user/support list per month, Number of messages in developers list per month, Average thread depth},
	month = {03/2009},
	pages = {5{\textendash}28},
	publisher = {The Reengineering Forum},
	organization = {The Reengineering Forum},
	abstract = {Traditionally, research on quality attributes was either kept under wraps within the organization that performed it, or carried out by outsiders using narrow, black-box techniques. The emergence of open source software has changed this picture allowing us to evaluate both software products and the processes that yield them. Thus, the software source code and the associated data stored in the version control system, the bug tracking databases, the mailing lists, and the wikis allow us to evaluate quality in a transparent way. Even better, the large number of (often competing) open source projects makes it possible to contrast the quality of comparable systems serving the same domain. Furthermore, by combining historical source code snapshots with significant events, such as bug discoveries and fixes, we can further dig into the causes and effects of problems. Here we present motivating examples, tools, and techniques that can be used to evaluate the quality of open source (and by extension also proprietary) software. },
	keywords = {bug tracking system, email, email archives, mailing list, metrics, open source, process quality attributes, product quality attributes, source code, SQO-OSS, wiki},
	doi = {10.1016/j.entcs.2009.02.058},
	url = {http://www.dmst.aueb.gr/dds/pubs/conf/2008-SQM-SQOOSS/html/SGKL09.html},
	attachments = {https://flosshub.org/sites/flosshub.org/files/entcs-sqooss.pdf},
	author = {Diomidis Spinellis and Gousios, Georgios and Vassilios Karakoidas and Panagiotis Louridas and Paul J. Adams and Samoladas, Ioannis and Ioannis Stamelos}
}
