@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 {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}
}
