@proceedings {1905,
	title = {Longitudinal Analysis of the Run-up to a Decision to Break-up (Fork) in a Community},
	volume = {496},
	year = {2017},
	month = {05/2017},
	pages = {204-217},
	publisher = {Springer},
	abstract = {In this paper, we use a developer-oriented statistical approach to understand what causes people in complex software development networks to decide to fork (break away), and what changes a community goes through in the run-up to a decision to break-up. Developing complex software systems is complex. Software developers interact. They may have the same or different goals, communication styles, or values. Interactions can be healthy or troubled. Troubled interactions cause troubled communities, that face failure. Some of these failures manifest themselves as a community split (known as forking). These failures affects many people; developers and users. Can we save troubled projects? We statistically model the longitudinal socio-grams of software developers and present early indicators and warning signs that can be used to predict an imminent break-up decision.

},
	keywords = {community of software developers, forks, longitudinal study},
	doi = {10.1007/978-3-319-57735-7_19},
	url = {https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-57735-7_19},
	author = {Amirhosein {\textquotedblleft}Emerson{\textquotedblright} Azarbakht and Jensen, Carlos}
}
@proceedings {1439,
	title = {A Comprehensive Study of Software Forks: Dates, Reasons and Outcomes},
	volume = {378},
	year = {2012},
	pages = {1-14},
	publisher = {IFIP AICT},
	abstract = {Summary. In general it is assumed that a software product evolves within the authoring company or group of developers that develop the project. However, in some cases different groups of developers make the software evolve in different directions, a situation which is commonly known as a fork. In the case of free software, although forking is a practice that is considered as a last resort, it is inherent to the four freedoms. This paper tries to shed some light on the practice of forking. Therefore, we have identified significant forks, several hundreds in total, and have studied them in depth. Among the issues that have been analyzed for each fork is the date when the forking occurred, the reason of the fork, and the outcome of the fork, i.e., if the original or the forking project are still developed. Our investigation shows, among other results, that forks occur in every software domain, that they have become more frequent in recent years, and that very few forks merge with the original project.},
	keywords = {forking, forks, free software, Legal, open source, social, software evolution, sustainability},
	attachments = {https://flosshub.org/sites/flosshub.org/files/paper_0.pdf},
	author = {Gregorio Robles and Gonz{\'a}lez-Barahona, Jes{\'u}s M.}
}
