@proceedings {1875,
	title = {Considering the use of walled gardens for FLOSS project communication},
	year = {2017},
	month = {05/2017},
	abstract = {At its core, free, libre, and open source software (FLOSS) is defined by its adherence to a set of licenses that give various freedoms to the users of the software, for example the ability to use the software, to read or modify its source code, and to distribute the software to others. In addition, many FLOSS projects and developers also champion other values related to "freedom" and "openness", such as transparency, for example in communication and decision-making, or community-orientedness, for example in broadening access, collaboration, and participation. This paper explores how one increasingly common software development practice - communicating inside non-archived, third-party "walled gardens" - puts these FLOSS values into conflict. If communities choose to use non-archived walled gardens for communication, they may be prioritizing one type of openness (broad participation) over another (transparency). We use 18 FLOSS projects as a sample to describe how walled gardens are currently being used for intra-project communication, as well as to determine whether or not these projects provide archives of these communications. Findings will be useful to the FLOSS community as a whole as it seeks to under- stand the evolution and impact of its communication choices.},
	keywords = {apache, chat, communication, email, free software, irc, mailing list, open source, Slack, Stack Overflow, teams, Wordpress},
	doi = {10.1007/978-3-319-57735-7_1},
	url = {https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007\%2F978-3-319-57735-7_1.pdf},
	attachments = {https://flosshub.org/sites/flosshub.org/files/preprint_0.pdf},
	author = {Squire, Megan}
}
@proceedings {1715,
	title = {"Should we move to Stack Overflow?" Measuring the utility of social media for developer support},
	year = {2015},
	month = {05/2015},
	pages = {10pp},
	publisher = {IEEE},
	abstract = {Stack Overflow is an enormously popular question-and-answer web site intended for software developers to help each other with programming issues. Some software projects aimed at developers (for example, application programming interfaces, application engines, cloud services, development frameworks, and the like) are closing their self-supported developer discussion forums and mailing lists and instead directing developers to use special-purpose tags on Stack Overflow. The goals of this paper are to document the main reasons given for moving developer support to Stack Overflow, and then to collect and analyze data from a group of software projects that have done this, in order to show whether the expected quality of support was actually achieved. The analysis shows that for all four software projects in this study, two of the desired quality indicators, developer participation and response time, did show improvements on Stack Overflow as compared to mailing lists and forums. However, we also found several projects that moved back from Stack Overflow, despite achieving these desired improvements. The results of this study are applicable to a wide variety of software projects that provide developer support using social media.},
	keywords = {developer support, forums, mailing list, metrics, quality, social media, Stack Overflow, technical support},
	attachments = {https://flosshub.org/sites/flosshub.org/files/SEIP2015stackv2.pdf},
	author = {Squire, Megan}
}
@proceedings {1561,
	title = {A Replicable Infrastructure for Empirical Studies of Email Archives},
	year = {2013},
	month = {10/2013},
	pages = {43-50},
	publisher = {IEEE},
	address = {Baltimore, MD, USA},
	abstract = {This paper describes a replicable infrastructure solution for conducting empirical software engineering studies based on email mailing list archives. Mailing list emails, such as those affiliated with free, libre, and open source software (FLOSS) projects, are currently archived in several places online, but each research team that wishes to study these email artifacts closely must design their own solution for collection, storage and cleaning of the data. Consequently, research results will be difficult to replicate, especially as the email archive for any living project will still be continually growing. This paper describes a simple, replicable infrastructure for the collection, storage, and cleaning of project email data and analyses.},
	keywords = {apache, cleaning, collection, couchdb, database, document-oriented database, email, lucene, mailing lists, nosql, replication, storage},
	isbn = {978-0-7695-5121-0},
	attachments = {https://flosshub.org/sites/flosshub.org/files/RESERv2.pdf},
	author = {Squire, Megan}
}
@conference {1317,
	title = {Describing the Software Forge Ecosystem},
	booktitle = {45th Hawai{\textquoteright}i International Conference on System Sciences},
	year = {2012},
	note = {http://flossmole.org/content/everything-you-ever-wanted-know-about-software-forges-code-forges-june-2011},
	month = {01/2012},
	pages = {3416-3425},
	abstract = {Code forges are online software systems that are designed to support teams doing software development work. There have been few if any attempts in the research literature to describe the web of people, projects, and tools that make up the free, libre, and open source (FLOSS) forge ecosystem. The main contributions of this paper are (1) to introduce a classification of FLOSS-oriented forges according to their characteristics; (2) to describe the forge-level and project-level data and artifacts currently available at each FLOSS forge; (3) to show various patterns already discovered in the FLOSS forge ecosystem, such as timelines of creation or arrangements by size or feature; (4) to make some recommendations to forge providers and data collectors about how to expose the structure and information in the forges; and (5) to describe the effort needed to extend our publicly- available information about the FLOSS forge ecosystem into the future.},
	keywords = {features, FLOSS, forge, hosting, metrics},
	attachments = {https://flosshub.org/sites/flosshub.org/files/SquireWilliamsHICSS2012.pdf},
	author = {Squire, Megan and Williams, David}
}
@article {1519,
	title = {How the FLOSS Research Community Uses Email Archives},
	journal = {International Journal of Open Source Software and Processes},
	volume = {4},
	year = {2012},
	note = {classifies 72 FLOSS papers into various analysis categories},
	month = {12/2012},
	pages = {37 - 59},
	abstract = {Artifacts of the software development process, such as source code or emails between developers, are a frequent object of study in empirical software engineering literature. One of the hallmarks of free, libre, and open source software (FLOSS) projects is that the artifacts of the development process are publicly-accessible and therefore easily collected and studied. Thus, there is a long history in the FLOSS research community of using these artifacts to gain understanding about the phenomenon of open source software, which could then be compared to studies of software engineering more generally. This paper looks specifically at how the FLOSS research community has used email artifacts from free and open source projects. It provides a classification of the relevant literature using a publicly-available online repository of papers about FLOSS development using email. The outcome of this paper is to provide a broad overview for the software engineering and FLOSS research communities of how other researchers have used FLOSS email message artifacts in their work},
	keywords = {email, email archives, literature, mailing lists, review, Survey},
	issn = {1942-3934},
	doi = {10.4018/jossp.2012010103},
	attachments = {https://flosshub.org/sites/flosshub.org/files/ijossp_v3_PREPRINT.pdf},
	author = {Squire, Megan}
}
