@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}
}
@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}
}
@conference {stewart2002an-explorat,
	title = {An Exploratory Study of Factors Influencing the Level of Vitality and Popularity of Open Source Projects},
	booktitle = {ICIS 2002. Proceedings of International Conference on Information Systems 2002},
	year = {2002},
	note = {"We are currently tracking publicly available data on 240 open source projects registered on the freshmeat Website." "First, we randomly selected a total of 120 projects from the utilities, software development, and games and entertainment areas. We then selected 120 projects from these forums that had been registered on the site during the two weeks prior to the start of our data collection effort."},
	month = {2002},
	pages = {1-5},
	abstract = {In this research, we ask the question: What differentiates successful from unsuccessful open source software projects? Using a sample of 240 open source projects, we examine how organizational sponsorship, target audience (developer versus end user), license choice, and development status interact over time to influence the extent to which open source software projects attract user attention and developer activity.},
	keywords = {activity, audience, developers, freshmeat, license analysis, licenses, organizational sponsorship, project success, roles, status, target audience, users},
	author = {Stewart, Katherine J. and Ammeter, Tony}
}
