@conference {Mitropoulos:2014:BCM:2597073.2597123,
	title = {The Bug Catalog of the Maven Ecosystem},
	booktitle = {Proceedings of the 11th Working Conference on Mining Software Repositories},
	series = {MSR 2014},
	year = {2014},
	pages = {372{\textendash}375},
	publisher = {ACM},
	organization = {ACM},
	address = {New York, NY, USA},
	abstract = {Examining software ecosystems can provide the research community with data regarding artifacts, processes, and communities. We present a dataset obtained from the Maven central repository ecosystem (approximately 265GB of data) by statically analyzing the repository to detect potential software bugs. For our analysis we used FindBugs, a tool that examines Java bytecode to detect numerous types of bugs. The dataset contains the metrics results that FindBugs reports for every project version (a JAR) included in the ecosystem. For every version we also stored specific metadata such as the JAR{\textquoteright}s size, its dependencies and others. Our dataset can be used to produce interesting research results, as we show in specific examples.
},
	keywords = {findbugs, Maven Repository, msr data showcase, Software Bugs},
	isbn = {978-1-4503-2863-0},
	doi = {10.1145/2597073.2597123},
	url = {http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/2597073.2597123},
	attachments = {https://flosshub.org/sites/flosshub.org/files/mitro.pdf},
	author = {Mitropoulos, Dimitris and Vassilios Karakoidas and Louridas, Panos and Gousios, Georgios and Diomidis Spinellis}
}
@conference {SGKL09,
	title = {Evaluating the Quality of Open Source Software},
	booktitle = {Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science},
	volume = {233},
	year = {2008},
	note = {"the software source code and the associated data stored in the version control system, the bug tracking databases, the mailing lists, and the wikis allow us to evaluate quality in a transparent way"
"The data collection system collects the raw data from open source projects"
Mailing lists are measured in: Number of unique subscribers, Number of messages in user/support list per month, Number of messages in developers list per month, Average thread depth},
	month = {03/2009},
	pages = {5{\textendash}28},
	publisher = {The Reengineering Forum},
	organization = {The Reengineering Forum},
	abstract = {Traditionally, research on quality attributes was either kept under wraps within the organization that performed it, or carried out by outsiders using narrow, black-box techniques. The emergence of open source software has changed this picture allowing us to evaluate both software products and the processes that yield them. Thus, the software source code and the associated data stored in the version control system, the bug tracking databases, the mailing lists, and the wikis allow us to evaluate quality in a transparent way. Even better, the large number of (often competing) open source projects makes it possible to contrast the quality of comparable systems serving the same domain. Furthermore, by combining historical source code snapshots with significant events, such as bug discoveries and fixes, we can further dig into the causes and effects of problems. Here we present motivating examples, tools, and techniques that can be used to evaluate the quality of open source (and by extension also proprietary) software. },
	keywords = {bug tracking system, email, email archives, mailing list, metrics, open source, process quality attributes, product quality attributes, source code, SQO-OSS, wiki},
	doi = {10.1016/j.entcs.2009.02.058},
	url = {http://www.dmst.aueb.gr/dds/pubs/conf/2008-SQM-SQOOSS/html/SGKL09.html},
	attachments = {https://flosshub.org/sites/flosshub.org/files/entcs-sqooss.pdf},
	author = {Diomidis Spinellis and Gousios, Georgios and Vassilios Karakoidas and Panagiotis Louridas and Paul J. Adams and Samoladas, Ioannis and Ioannis Stamelos}
}
