@article {Xu2009151,
	title = {Volunteers{\textquoteright} involvement in online community based software development},
	journal = {Information \& Management},
	volume = {46},
	number = {3},
	year = {2009},
	note = {"Data were collected through an online survey and by searching project archives. On Sourceforge.net, each developer was uniquely identified with a user account, and the developer{\textquoteright}s performance was assessed through the number of function points accepted by the project in a certain time period, obtained through conversion and calculation from the project{\textquoteright}s code repository. Data for other constructs were obtained from the developers{\textquoteright} response to the online survey. "
"a developer{\textquoteright}s performance was measured by the number of function points made and accepted into the project during the observed time period."

project age, development status, license type, number of developers},
	pages = {151 - 158},
	abstract = {We sought to gain understanding of voluntary developers{\textquoteright} involvement in open source software (OSS) projects. Data were collected from voluntary developers working on open source projects. Our findings indicated that a voluntary developer{\textquoteright}s involvement was very important to his or her performance and that involvement was dependent on individual motivations (personal software needs, reputation and skills gaining expectation, enjoyment in open source coding) and project community factors (leadership effectiveness, interpersonal relationship, community ideology). Our work contributes theoretically and empirically to the body of OSS research and has practical implications for OSS project management.},
	keywords = {age, developers, effectiveness, function points, ideology, leadership, MOTIVATION, scm, sourceforge, status, Survey, team size, Volunteers},
	issn = {0378-7206},
	doi = {DOI: 10.1016/j.im.2008.12.005},
	url = {http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6VD0-4VP1CN0-1/2/8e1c7be4fcedd1419209c5c843ffa923},
	author = {Bo Xu and Donald R. Jones and Bingjia Shao}
}
@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 {flosswp113,
	title = {The Impact of Ideology on Effectiveness in Open Source Software Development Teams},
	journal = {MIS Quarterly},
	volume = {30},
	number = {2},
	year = {2006},
	note = {"...we collected data related to OSS projects hosted on Sourceforge (www.sourceforge.net)."
"Data was collected using two surveys and from the Sourceforge website."
},
	month = {2006},
	pages = {291-314},
	abstract = {The emerging work on understanding open source software has argued for the importance of understanding what leads to effectiveness in OSS development teams and has pointed to the importance of ideology. This paper develops a framework of the OSS ideology (including specific norms, beliefs, and values) and a theoretical model to show how adherence to components of the ideology impact effectiveness in OSS teams. The model is based on the idea that ideology provides clan control, which is important in OSS development settings because OSS teams generally lack formal behavioral and outcome controls. The paper hypothesizes both direct effects of ideology on OSS team effectiveness and indirect effects via influences on affective trust, cognitive trust, and communication quality. Hypotheses are tested using survey and objective data on OSS projects. Four effectiveness measures are used to capture unique aspects of effectiveness in OSS including both the extent to which a team attracts input from the community and the team{\textquoteright}s success in accomplishing project outcomes. Results support the main thesis that OSS team members{\textquoteright} adherence to the tenets of the OSS community ideology enhances OSS team effectiveness. The study uncovers several differences in the importance of OSS norms, beliefs, and values to different kinds of OSS team effectiveness and discusses implications for theory and practice.},
	keywords = {bug fixing, bug reports, bug tracking, communication, COMMUNITY, effectiveness, feature requests, ideology, metadata, sourceforge, Survey, team effort, team size, trust},
	attachments = {https://flosshub.org/sites/flosshub.org/files/stewartgosain2.pdf},
	author = {Stewart, K. and Gosain, S.}
}
