@inbook {1782,
	title = {Open Source Technology Development},
	booktitle = {Handbook of Science and Technology Convergence},
	year = {2015},
	pages = {1-9},
	publisher = {Springer International Publishing},
	organization = {Springer International Publishing},
	abstract = {In this chapter, we introduce the practices of free/libre open source software (FLOSS) development as an instance of the convergence of technological affordances with novel social practices to create a novel mode of work. We then consider how FLOSS software might be used for various scientific applications, perhaps leading to a convergence of current distinct disciplines. We conclude by considering how the technologies and practices of FLOSS development might be applied to other settings, thus leading to further convergence of those settings.
},
	keywords = {Free/Libre Open Source Software},
	doi = {10.1007/978-3-319-04033-2_29-1},
	url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-04033-2_29-1},
	author = {Kevin Crowston},
	editor = {Bainbridge, William Sims and Roco, Mihail C.}
}
@article {1805,
	title = {Stigmergic coordination in FLOSS development teams: Integrating explicit and implicit mechanisms},
	journal = {Cognitive Systems Research},
	year = {2015},
	month = {12/2015},
	abstract = {The vast majority of literature on coordination in team-based projects has drawn on a conceptual separation between explicit (e.g. plans, feedbacks) and implicit coordination mechanisms (e.g. mental maps, shared knowledge). This analytical distinction presents some limitations in explaining how coordination is reached in organizations characterized by distributed teams, scarce face to face meetings and fuzzy and changing lines of authority, as in free/libre open source software (FLOSS) development.

Analyzing empirical illustrations from two FLOSS projects, we highlight the existence of a peculiar model, stigmergic coordination, which includes aspects of both implicit and explicit mechanisms. The work product itself (implicit) and the characteristics under which it is shared (explicit) play an under-appreciated role in helping software developers manage dependencies as they arise. We develop this argument beyond the existing literature by working with an existing coordination framework, considering the role that the codebase itself might play at each step. We also discuss the features and the practices to support stigmergic coordination in distributed teams, as well as recommendations for future research. {\textquotedblleft}Not everything that implicitly exists needs to be rendered explicit{\textquotedblright} (Sloterdijk, 2009, p. 3).},
	keywords = {Coordination mechanisms, distributed teams, FLOSS teams, Stigmergic coordination},
	issn = {13890417},
	doi = {10.1016/j.cogsys.2015.12.003},
	url = {http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389041715000339},
	attachments = {https://flosshub.org/sites/flosshub.org/files/COGSYS-RS-\%28HHS\%29-\%282015\%29-\%283\%29.pdf},
	author = {Bolici, Francesco and Howison, James and Kevin Crowston}
}
@article {9400325220140301,
	title = {COLLABORATION THROUGH OPEN SUPERPOSITION: A THEORY OF THE OPEN SOURCE WAY.},
	journal = {MIS Quarterly},
	volume = {38},
	number = {1},
	year = {2014},
	pages = {29 - A9},
	abstract = {This paper develops and illustrates the theory of collaboration through open superposition: the process of depositing motivationally independent layers of work on top of each other over time. The theory is developed in a study of community-based free and open source software (FLOSS) development, through a research arc of discovery (participant observation), replication (two archival case studies), and theorization. The theory explains two key findings: (1) the overwhelming majority of work is accomplished with only a single programmer working on any one task, and (2) tasks that appear too large for any one individual are more likely to be deferred until they are easier rather than being undertaken through structured team work. Moreover, the theory explains how working through open superposition can lead to the discovery of a work breakdown that results in complex, functionally interdependent, work being accomplished without crippling search costs. We identify a set of socio-technical},
	keywords = {COLLABORATION, COMPUTER programmers, COMPUTER programming, COMPUTER software, coordination, FREEWARE (Computer software), INFORMATION storage \& retrieval systems, open source software, research, socio-technical system},
	issn = {02767783},
	author = {Howison, James and Kevin Crowston}
}
@conference {1256,
	title = {Analyzing Leadership Dynamics in Distributed Group Communication},
	booktitle = {2010 43rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS 2010)},
	year = {2010},
	note = {"Our analysis examines the communication patterns in two FLOSS development projects, Fire and Gaim"
"These data were imported into a database to allow automated analysis. The Fire data set includes about 1,800 events in the user email list, 7,800 messages in the developer venues, and 1,300 events in the combined trackers, spanning a period of 54 months. The significantly larger Gaim data set included over 41,000 events in the user forum, over 30,000 events in the developer venues, and about 20,000 events in the trackers, generated over 78 months."
"The dynamic network analysis was performed using a scientific workflow tool, Taverna Workbench"},
	pages = {1 - 10},
	publisher = {IEEE},
	organization = {IEEE},
	address = {Honolulu, Hawaii, USA},
	abstract = {We apply social network analysis (SNA) to examine the dynamics of leadership in distributed groups, specifically Free/Libre Open Source Software development projects, and its relation to group performance. Based on prior work on leadership in distributed groups, we identify leaders with those who make the highest level of contribution to the group and assess the degree of leadership by measuring centralization of communications. We compare the dynamics of leadership in two FLOSS projects, one more and one less effective. We find that in both projects, centralization was higher in developer-oriented communications venues than in user-oriented venues, suggesting higher degrees of leadership in developer venues. However, we do not find a consistent relation between centralization and effectiveness. We suggest that SNA can instead be useful for identifying interesting periods in the history of the project, e.g., periods where the leadership of the project is in transition.},
	keywords = {core, DYNAMICS, email, email archives, fire, flossmole, gaim, leadership, mailing list, project success, social network analysis, srda},
	isbn = {978-1-4244-5509-6},
	doi = {10.1109/HICSS.2010.62},
	attachments = {https://flosshub.org/sites/flosshub.org/files/07-06-02.pdf},
	author = {Kevin Crowston and Andrea Wiggins and Howison, James}
}
@conference {Wiggins:2010,
	title = {Reclassifying Success and Tragedy in {FLOSS} Projects},
	booktitle = {Proceedings of the International Conference on Open Source Systems (OSS)},
	year = {2010},
	month = {31 May{\textendash}2 June},
	address = {Notre Dame, IN, USA},
	abstract = {This paper presents the results of a replication of English \& Schweik{\textquoteright}s 2007 paper classifying FLOSS projects according to their stage of growth and indicators of success. We recreated the analysis using a comparable data set from 2006, with one additional point in time. We also expanded upon the original results by applying different criteria for evaluating the rate of new software releases for sustainability of project activity. We discuss the points of convergence and divergence from the original work from these extensions of the classification, and their implications for studying FLOSS development using archival data. The paper contributes new analysis of operationalizing success in FLOSS projects, with discussion of implications of the findings.},
	keywords = {FLOSS},
	author = {Andrea Wiggins and Kevin Crowston}
}
@article {Crowston:2008,
	title = {Bug Fixing Practices within Free/Libre Open Source Software Development Teams},
	journal = {Journal of Database Management},
	volume = {19},
	number = {2},
	year = {2008},
	note = {"Projects to be studied were selected from those hosted on SourceForge, (http://sourceforge.net/)"
"we chose projects for which data we need for our analysis are publicly available, meaning a large number of bug reports"
"we chose teams with more than 8 developers"
"Only 140 projects of SourceForge met the first two requirements in 2002 when we drew our sample"
kicq, gaim, phpmyadmin, dynapi
"First, we obtained data indica- tive of the effectiveness of each project, such as its level of activity, number of downloads and development status"
"we elected to use objective data about the bug- fixing process. Hence, the main source of data about the bug-fixing process was obtained from the archives of the bug tracking system, which is the tool used to support the bug-fixing process"},
	pages = {1{\textendash}30},
	abstract = {Free/libre open source software (FLOSS, e.g., Linux or Apache) is primarily developed by distributed teams. Developers contribute from around the world and coordinate their activity almost exclusively by means of email and bulletin boards, yet some how profit from the advantages and evade the challenges of distributed software development. In this article we investigate the structure and the coordination practices adopted by development teams during the bug-fixing process, which is considered one of main areas of FLOSS project success. In particular, based on a codification of the messages recorded in the bug tracking system of four projects, we identify the accomplished tasks, the adopted coordination mechanisms, and the role undertaken by both the FLOSS development team and the FLOSS community. We conclude with suggestions for further research.},
	keywords = {activity, bug tracker, bug tracking system, coordination, downloads, dynapi, effectiveness, FLOSS, gaim, kicq, phpmyadmin, project success, size, status},
	issn = {1063-8016},
	attachments = {https://flosshub.org/sites/flosshub.org/files/CrowstonScozziJDBM2008.pdf},
	author = {Kevin Crowston and Barbara Scozzi}
}
@article {flosswp405,
	title = {Self-organization of teams for free/libre open source software development},
	journal = {Information and Software Technology Journal},
	volume = {49},
	number = {564-575},
	year = {2007},
	note = {"First, the data from these projects that we needed for analysis had to be publicly available (ruling out projects that limit access to their email lists or trackers). Second, we chose the projects that had more than 7 members"..."projects that have attracted numerous developers beyond the initial project founders, are continuing to release software, have numerous downloads and have an active user community that provides feedback"
"3 FLOSS projects were selected for analysis, namely Gaim, eGroupWare and Compiere ERP."

all had sourceforge hosting

Data: "The primary data used for our study were interactions on the main developer communication forum, either a developer mailing list or web-based discussion forum."

Analysis: "For this project, we inductively content-analyzed developer email interactions to identify the task assignment mechanisms used in the process. We coded each instance of task assignment identified on three dimensions: who assigned the task, to whom, and how"
},
	abstract = {This paper provides empirical evidence about how free/libre open source software development teams self-organize their work. Following a case study methodology, we examined developer interaction data from three active and successful FLOSS projects using qualitative research methods, specifically inductive content analysis, to identify the task-assignment mechanisms used by the participants. We found that "self-assignment" was the most common mechanism across three FLOSS projects. This mechanism is consistent with expectations for distributed and largely volunteer teams. We conclude by discussing whether these emergent practices can be usefully transferred to mainstream practice and indicating directions for future research.},
	keywords = {case study, compiere, coordination, DESIGN, distributed teams, egroupware, email, email archives, forum, free/libre open source software development, gaim, INTERNET, mailing list, metadata, qualitative research methods, self-organizing teams, sourceforge, SYSTEMS, task assignment, WORK},
	attachments = {https://flosshub.org/sites/flosshub.org/files/task_assignment_final.pdf},
	author = {Kevin Crowston and Li, Qing and Kangning Wei and Eseryel, U. Yeliz and Howison, James}
}
@article {Crowston:2006a,
	title = {Hierarchy and centralization in Free and Open Source Software team communications},
	journal = {Knowledge, Technology \& Policy},
	volume = {18},
	number = {4},
	year = {2006},
	pages = {65{\textendash}85},
	abstract = {Free/Libre Open Source Software (FLOSS) development teams provide an interesting and convenient setting for studying distributed work. We begin by answering perhaps the most basic question: what is the social structure of these teams? Based on a social network analysis of interactions represented in 62,110 bug reports from 122 large and active projects, we find that some OSS teams are highly centralized, but contrary to expectation, others are not. Projects are mostly quite hierarchical on four measures of hierarchy, consistent with past research but contrary to the popular image of these projects. Furthermore, we find that the level of centralization is negatively correlated with project size, suggesting that larger projects become more modular. The paper makes a further methodological contribution by identifying appropriate analysis approaches for interaction data. We conclude by sketching directions for future research.},
	keywords = {apache, bug fixing, bug tracking, FLOSS, project success, savannah, social network analysis, sourceforge, team size, teams},
	attachments = {https://flosshub.org/sites/flosshub.org/files/CrowstonHierarchyAndCentralization.pdf},
	author = {Kevin Crowston and Howison, James}
}
@article {Crowston:2006,
	title = {Information systems success in Free and Open Source Software development: Theory and measures},
	journal = {Software Process{\textendash}Improvement and Practice},
	volume = {11},
	number = {2},
	year = {2006},
	note = {"we continue our examination of success measures using data from Sourceforge..."
"e chose the number of developers (assessed from the records of the project and from bug fixing logs), bug-fixing time, and popularity (assessed from the number of downloads and viewings of project Web pages, and inclusion in distributions). These measures were chosen because they span the reconsidered FLOSS development process discussed above, including inputs (number of developers), process (speed of bug fixing) and output (popularity)."},
	pages = {123{\textendash}148},
	abstract = {Information systems success is one of the most widely used dependent variables in information systems (IS) research, but research on Free/Libre and Open Source software (FLOSS) often fails to appropriately conceptualize this important concept. In this paper, we reconsider what success means within a FLOSS context. We first review existing models of IS success and success variables used in FLOSS research and assess them for their usefulness, practicality and fit to the FLOSS context. Then, drawing on a theoretical model of group effectiveness in the FLOSS development process, as well as an online discussion group with developers, we present additional concepts that are central to an appropriate understanding of success for FLOSS. In order to examine the practicality and validity of this conceptual scheme, the second half of our paper presents an empirical study that demonstrates its operationalization of the chosen measures and assesses their internal validity. We use data from SourceForge to measure the project{\textquoteright}s effectiveness in team building, the speed of the project at responding to bug reports and the project{\textquoteright}s popularity. We conclude by discussing the implications of this study for our proposed extension of IS success in the context of FLOSS development and highlight future directions for research.},
	keywords = {bug fixing, developers, downloads, FLOSS, flossmole, page views, popularity, project success, size, sourceforge, success, team size},
	doi = {10.1002/spip.259},
	attachments = {https://flosshub.org/sites/flosshub.org/files/CrowstonHowisonAnnabi2006.pdf},
	author = {Kevin Crowston and Howison, James and Hala Annabi}
}
@conference {708,
	title = {Social dynamics of free and open source team communications},
	booktitle = {OSS2006: Open Source Systems (IFIP 2.13)},
	series = {IFIP International Federation for Information Processing },
	volume = {203/2006},
	year = {2006},
	month = {06/2006},
	pages = {319 - 330},
	publisher = {Springer},
	organization = {Springer},
	abstract = {This paper furthers inquiry into the social structure of free and open source software (FLOSS) teams by undertaking social network analysis across time. Contrary to expectations, we confirmed earlier findings of a wide distribution of centralizations even when examining the networks over time. The paper also provides empirical evidence that while change at the center of FLOSS projects is relatively uncommon, participation across the project communities is highly skewed, with many participants appearing for only one period. Surprisingly, large project teams are not more likely to undergo change at their centers.
},
	keywords = {bug fixing, bug reports, bug tracker, bug tracking, bugs, communications, Dynamic social networks, FLOSS teams, Human Factors, social network analysis, software development, sourceforge},
	issn = {978-0-387-34225-2},
	doi = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/0-387-34226-5_32},
	attachments = {https://flosshub.org/sites/flosshub.org/files/Social\%20dynamics\%20of\%20free\%20and\%20open\%20source\%20team.pdf},
	author = {Howison, James and Inoue, Keisuke and Kevin Crowston}
}
@proceedings {89,
	title = {Coordination of Free/Libre Open Source Software development},
	year = {2005},
	note = {"The data used for the study were interactions on the main developer communication venue, either a developer mailing list or online forum"
sourceforge
},
	address = {Las Vegas, NV, USA},
	abstract = {The apparent success of free/libre open source software (FLOSS) development projects such as Linux, Apache, and many others has raised the question, what lessons from FLOSS development can be transferred to mainstream software development? In this paper, we use coordination theory to analyze coordination mechanisms in FLOSS development and compare our analysis with existing literature on coordination in proprietary software development. We examined developer interaction data from three active and successful FLOSS projects and used content analysis to identify the coordination mechanisms used by the participants. We found that there were similarities between the FLOSS groups and the reported practices of the proprietary project in the coordination mechanisms used to manage task-task dependencies. However, we found clear differences in the coordination mechanisms used to manage task-actor dependencies. While published descriptions of proprietary software development involved an elaborate system to locate the developer who owned the relevant piece of code, we found that {\textquotedblleft}self-assignment{\textquotedblright} was the most common mechanism across three FLOSS projects. This coordination mechanism is consistent with expectations for distributed and largely volunteer teams. We conclude by discussing whether these emergent practices can be usefully transferred to mainstream practice and indicating directions for future research.},
	keywords = {case study, compiere, coordination, egroupware, email, email archives, FLOSS, gaim, mailing list},
	attachments = {https://flosshub.org/sites/flosshub.org/files/CrowstonWeiLiEseryelHowison.pdf},
	author = {Kevin Crowston and Kangning Wei and Li, Qing and Eseryel, U. Yeliz and Howison, James}
}
@conference {Crowston:2004,
	title = {Coordination practices for bug fixing within FLOSS development teams},
	booktitle = {1st International Workshop on Computer Supported Activity Coordination, 6th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems},
	year = {2004},
	note = {"First, we chose projects for which data we need for our analysis are publicly available (not all projects allow public access to the bug tracking system). Second, we chose teams with more than 8 members...we tried to select more and less suc- cessful development teams. To this aim we used the definitions of success proposed by [9], who suggest that a project is successful if it is active, the resulting software is downloaded and used and the code matures"

"Kicq, Gaim and PhPmyAdmin were chosen" - effective
DynAPI was chosen as an example of a less effective project" 

"We collected data indicative of the success of each project, such as its level of activity, number of downloads and development status. We then collected data from the archives of the bug tracking system, the tool used to support the bug fixing process"},
	address = {Porto, Portugal},
	abstract = {Free/Libre Open Source Software (FLOSS) is primarily developed by distributed teams. Developers contribute from around the world and coordinate their activity almost exclusively by means of email and bulletin boards. FLOSS development teams some how profit from the advantages and evade the challenges of distributed software development. Despite the relevance of the FLOSS both for research and practice, few studies have investigated the work practices adopted by these development teams. In this paper we investigate the structure and the coordination practices adopted by development teams during the bug-fixing process, which is considered one of main areas of FLOSS project success. In particular, based on a codification of the messages recorded in the bug tracking system of four projects, we identify the accomplished tasks, the adopted coordination mechanisms, and the role undertaken by both the FLOSS development team and the FLOSS community. We conclude with suggestions for further research.},
	keywords = {activity, bug fixing, bug reports, bug tracker, coordination, downloads, dynapi, FLOSS, gaim, kicq, phpmyadmin, status},
	attachments = {https://flosshub.org/sites/flosshub.org/files/CrowstonScozzi04coordination.pdf},
	author = {Kevin Crowston and Barbara Scozzi}
}
