@proceedings {1893, title = {The Open Source Officer Role {\textendash} Experiences}, volume = {496}, year = {2017}, month = {05/2017}, pages = {55-59}, publisher = {Springer}, abstract = {This papers describe the Open Source Officer role and the experiences from introducing this role in several companies. We outline the role description, main responsibilities, and interfaces to other roles and organizations. We investigated the role in several organization and bring interesting discrepancies and overlaps of how companies operate with OSS. }, keywords = {governance, inner source, maturity models}, doi = {10.1007/978-3-319-57735-7_6}, url = {https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-57735-7_6}, author = {Mols, CE and Wnuk, K and Lin{\r a}ker, J} } @proceedings {1451, title = {Exploring the Role of Outside Organizations in Free / Open Source Software Projects}, volume = {378}, year = {2012}, month = {09/2012}, pages = {201-215}, publisher = {IFIP AICT}, abstract = {Free/Open Source Software (FOSS) projects have a reputation for being grass-roots efforts driven by individual contributors volunteering their time and effort. While this may be true for a majority of smaller projects, it is not always the case for large projects. As projects grow in size, importance and complexity, many come to depend on corporations, universities, NGO{\textquoteright}s and governments, for support and contributions, either financially or through seconded staff. As outside organizations get involved in projects, how does this affect their governance, transparency and direction? To study this question we gathered bug reports and commit logs for GCC and the Linux Kernel. We found that outside organizations contribute a majority of code but rarely participate in bug triaging. Therefore their code does not necessarily address the needs of others and may distort governance and direction. We conclude that projects should examine their dependence on outside organizations}, keywords = {bug reports, commit, Community sustainability, Contributor affiliation, gcc, governance, linux kernel, Participation metrics}, url = {http://research.engr.oregonstate.edu/hci/sites/research.engr.oregonstate.edu.hci/files/papers/forrest2012exploring.pdf}, author = {Forrest, Darren and Jensen, Carlos and Mohan, Nitin and Davidson, Jennifer} } @proceedings {1269, title = {What kind of commons is free software?}, year = {2011}, note = {Available under a CreativeCommons BY-NC-SA license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/). The presentation slides are also attached; paper{\textquoteright}s LaTeX source files can be found at http://www.mediafire.com/?7k9dxbkna0x6irl}, month = {06/2011}, address = {Berlin, Germany}, abstract = {This paper analyzes free software under the light of commons theories, and tries to answer whether it is a managed or open access commons. It briefly presents commons studies and its main concepts, as well as the discussion on immaterial commons, arguing that goods{\textquoteright} intrinsic characteristics should not be viewed as absolute, but rather contextualized in social struggles. Then, it proposes a two-tier structure for analyzing free software as a commons, considering its dual nature as source and machine code. The two connected layers of the proposal - use and development - are characterized according to commons theory categories; Android and software forking are explored as examples. It concludes that the first layer resembles an open access commons, but with intensional boundaries, and that the second one resembles multiple managed commons. This disparity is associated with the category of nested enterprises and with the layers{\textquoteright} relations to appropriation and production.}, keywords = {commons, COMMUNITY, free software, governance}, issn = {1613-0073}, url = {http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-739/paper_10.pdf}, attachments = {https://flosshub.org/sites/flosshub.org/files/VIEIRA.pdf , https://flosshub.org/sites/flosshub.org/files/VIEIRA_presentation_0.odp}, author = {Vieira, Miguel Said} } @article {1100, title = {An Empirical Study on the Relationship Between Software Design Quality, Development Effort and Governance in Open Source Projects}, journal = {IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering}, volume = {34}, year = {2008}, note = {"empirical data from a sample of 75 major OS projects" no PDF to confirm [ms]}, month = {11/2008}, pages = {765 - 782}, abstract = {The relationship among software design quality, development effort, and governance practices is a traditional research problem. However, the extent to which consolidated results on this relationship remain valid for open source (OS) projects is an open research problem. An emerging body of literature contrasts the view of open source as an alternative to proprietary software and explains that there exists a continuum between closed and open source projects. This paper hypothesizes that as projects approach the OS end of the continuum, governance becomes less formal. In turn a less formal governance is hypothesized to require a higher-quality code as a means to facilitate coordination among developers by making the structure of code explicit and facilitate quality by removing the pressure of deadlines from contributors. However, a less formal governance is also hypothesized to increase development effort due to a more cumbersome coordination overhead. The verification of research hypotheses is based on empirical data from a sample of 75 major OS projects. Empirical evidence supports our hypotheses and suggests that software quality, mainly measured as coupling and inheritance, does not increase development effort, but represents an important managerial variable to implement the more open governance approach that characterizes OS projects which, in turn, increases development effort.}, keywords = {effort estimation, governance, quality, source code}, issn = {0098-5589}, doi = {10.1109/TSE.2008.68}, author = {Capra, E. and Francalanci, C. and Merlo, F.} } @article {Sadowski2008323, title = {Transition of governance in a mature open software source community: Evidence from the Debian case}, journal = {Information Economics and Policy}, volume = {20}, number = {4}, year = {2008}, note = {"We primarily used internal documents related to the contents and context of different Debian projects." "Furthermore, we attended several Debian conferences and were {\textquoteleft}{\textquoteleft}lurking around{\textquotedblright} on the Debian mailing lists, websites, IRC channels, etc."}, pages = {323 - 332}, abstract = {As open source software (OSS) communities mature, they have to introduce a variety of governance mechanisms to manage the participation of their members and to coordinate the launch of new releases. The Debian community introduced new mechanisms of informal administrative control based on a constitution, elected leaders, and used interactive communication channels. We show that these control mechanisms were introduced as a response to emerging innovative opportunities due to the usage of source packages and to the need to build a responsive organization within the Debian OSS community.}, keywords = {debian, governance}, issn = {0167-6245}, doi = {DOI: 10.1016/j.infoecopol.2008.05.001}, url = {http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6V8J-4SHF4BS-1/2/579ba679ee43d7c77302f3595334dd24}, author = {Bert M. Sadowski and Gaby Sadowski-Rasters and Geert Duysters} } @article {1124, title = {Motivation, Governance, and the Viability of Hybrid Forms in Open Source Software Development}, journal = {Management Science}, volume = {52}, year = {2006}, note = {"Data from three primary sources informed this research (Table 1). All data were collected in 2001{\textendash}2002." Online project documentation: All publicly available project descriptions, charters, bylaws, meeting minutes, etc. Mailing lists: Over 2,000 messages read over a three-month period prior to interviews Interviews "Ireadallpostingstoproject-specific and general mailing lists for both communities for a three-month period preceding the interviews. Over 2,000 messages were posted during this period. Read- ing these messages allowed me to gain familiarity with the technology..."}, month = {07/2006}, pages = {1000 - 1014}, abstract = {Open source software projects rely on the voluntary efforts of thousands of software developers, yet we know little about why developers choose to participate in this collective development process. This paper inductively derives a framework for understanding participation from the perspective of the individual software developer based on data from two software communities with different governance structures. In both communities, a need for software-related improvements drives initial participation. The majority of participants leave the community once their needs are met, however, a small subset remains involved. For this set of developers, motives evolve over time and participation becomes a hobby. These hobbyists are critical to the long-term viability of the software code: They take on tasks that might otherwise go undone and work to maintain the simplicity and modularity of the code. Governance structures affect this evolution of motives. Implications for firms interested in implementing hybrid strategies designed to combine the advantages of open source software development with proprietary ownership and control are discussed.}, keywords = {email, email archives, governance, INNOVATION, interview, mailing list, MOTIVATION, open source software development, Volunteers}, issn = {1526-5501}, doi = {10.1287/mnsc.1060.0553}, url = {http://faculty.washington.edu/skshah/Shah\%20-\%20Motivation,\%20Governance,\%20Hybrid\%20Forms.pdf}, attachments = {https://flosshub.org/sites/flosshub.org/files/Shah\%20-\%20Motivation\%2C\%20Governance\%2C\%20Hybrid\%20Forms.pdf}, author = {Shah, Sonali K.} }