Guilherme Avelino

Guilherme Avelino, Eleni Constantinou, Marco Tulio Valente et al.

Background: Evolution of open source projects frequently depends on a small number of core developers. The loss of such core developers might be detrimental for projects and even threaten their entire continuation. However, it is possible that new core developers assume the project maintenance and allow the project to survive. Aims: The objective of this paper is to provide empirical evidence on: 1) the frequency of project abandonment and survival, 2) the differences between abandoned and surviving projects, and 3) the motivation and difficulties faced when assuming an abandoned project. Method: We adopt a mixed-methods approach to investigate project abandonment and survival. We carefully select 1,932 popular GitHub projects and recover the abandoned and surviving projects, and conduct a survey with developers that have been instrumental in the survival of the projects. Results: We found that 315 projects (16%) were abandoned and 128 of these projects (41%) survived because of new core developers who assumed the project development. The survey indicates that (i) in most cases the new maintainers were aware of the project abandonment risks when they started to contribute; (ii) their own usage of the systems is the main motivation to contribute to such projects; (iii) human and social factors played a key role when making these contributions; and (iv) lack of time and the difficulty to obtain push access to the repositories are the main barriers faced by them. Conclusions: Project abandonment is a reality even in large open source projects and our work enables a better understanding of such risks, as well as highlights ways in avoiding them.

Guilherme Avelino, Leonardo Passos, Andre Hora et al.

Code authorship is a key information in large-scale open source systems. Among others, it allows maintainers to assess division of work and identify key collaborators. Interestingly, open-source communities lack guidelines on how to manage authorship. This could be mitigated by setting to build an empirical body of knowledge on how authorship-related measures evolve in successful open-source communities. Towards that direction, we perform a case study on the Linux kernel. Our results show that: (a) only a small portion of developers (26 %) makes significant contributions to the code base; (b) the distribution of the number of files per author is highly skewed --- a small group of top authors (3 %) is responsible for hundreds of files, while most authors (75 %) are responsible for at most 11 files; (c) most authors (62 %) have a specialist profile; (d) authors with a high number of co-authorship connections tend to collaborate with others with less connections.

Guilherme Avelino, Leonardo Passos, Andre Hora et al.

Truck Factor (TF) is a metric proposed by the agile community as a tool to identify concentration of knowledge in software development environments. It states the minimal number of developers that have to be hit by a truck (or quit) before a project is incapacitated. In other words, TF helps to measure how prepared is a project to deal with developer turnover. Despite its clear relevance, few studies explore this metric. Altogether there is no consensus about how to calculate it, and no supporting evidence backing estimates for systems in the wild. To mitigate both issues, we propose a novel (and automated) approach for estimating TF-values, which we execute against a corpus of 133 popular project in GitHub. We later survey developers as a means to assess the reliability of our results. Among others, we find that the majority of our target systems (65%) have TF <= 2. Surveying developers from 67 target systems provides confidence towards our estimates; in 84% of the valid answers we collect, developers agree or partially agree that the TF's authors are the main authors of their systems; in 53% we receive a positive or partially positive answer regarding our estimated truck factors.