CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 39Open Source Software InnovationsSoftware Engineering Techniques and PracticesWikis in Education and Collaboration

The Long Road Ahead: Ongoing Challenges in Contributing to Large OSS Organizations and What to Do

Open access
Guizani, Mariam, Chatterjee, Amreeta, Trinkenreich, Bianca, May, Mary Evelyn, Noa-Guevara, Geraldine J., Russell, Liam James, Cuevas Zambrano, Griselda G., Izquierdo-Cortazar, Daniel +3 more·2021·Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction
DOI 10.1145/3479551
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Open source communities hosted in large foundations operate in a complex socio-technical ecosystem, which includes a heterogeneous mix of projects and stakeholders. Previous work has thus far investigated the challenges faced in OSS communities from the point of view of specific stakeholders, primarily at the level of individual projects. None have yet studied the challenges faced within a large, federated open source organization. In this paper, we aim to bridge this gap to identify ongoing challenges contributors face in a mature OSS organization. To do so, we surveyed 624 contributors at the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) and ran 11 semi-structured follow up interviews. We validated our findings through member checking with the interviewees as well as the ASF Diversity and Inclusion (D&I) committee. The contributions of this paper include: (1) an empirically-evidenced conceptual model of the 88 challenges that contributors face in a mature OSS foundation and (2) a set of 48 community-recommended strategies for alleviating these challenges. Our results show that even well-established and mature organizations still face a variety of individual and project-specific challenges and that it is difficult to design a comprehensive set of processes and guidelines to match the needs and expectations of a diverse and large federated community. Our conceptual challenges model and associated strategies to mitigate them can provide guidance to other OSS foundations and projects helping them in building better support processes and tools to create a successful, thriving community of contributors.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/3479551

Cites

8 of 8 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Several OSS projects still rely on informal or opaque governance practices, often centered on a few long-standing maintainers.

    “Several OSS projects still rely on informal or opaque governance practices, often centered on a few long-standing maintainers [22, 29, 39].”

    From Governance in Practice: How Open Source Projects Define and Document Roles (2026) · cites this paper as [22]

    Section 5.1 reports unclear voting and consensus rules, and the Discussion describes vague regulations and calls for clearer guidance on the ASF’s governance structure. Section 7.1 reports a participant’s view that people with less than ten years’ experience are not well regarded as foundation leaders. These passages support concerns about opaque governance and the influence of tenure, but do not establish that several OSS projects rely on informal governance centered on a few long-standing maintainers. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • This observation reinforces concerns about bottlenecks and burnout in OSS leadership.

    “This observation reinforces concerns about bottlenecks and burnout in OSS leadership [22, 39].”

    From Governance in Practice: How Open Source Projects Define and Document Roles (2026) · cites this paper as [22]

    The Discussion (section 8; page unavailable) says OSS communities need to identify bottlenecks in their contribution processes. That supports the bottleneck concern, but the passages do not establish burnout among OSS leaders; a search for “burnout” found no passage addressing it. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 107

  1. Sogol Balali, Umayal Annamalai, Hema Susmita Padala, Bianca Trinkenreich, Marco A Gerosa, Igor Steinmacher, and Anita Sarma. 2020. Recommending Tasks to Newcomers in OSS Projects: How Do Mentors Handle It?. In Proceedings of the 16th International Symposium on Open Collaboration. 1-14.
  2. Sogol Balali, Igor Steinmacher, Umayal Annamalai, Anita Sarma, and Marco Aurelio Gerosa. 2018. Newcomers' barriers... is that all? an analysis of mentors' and newcomers' barriers in OSS projects. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) 27, 3-6 (2018), 679-714.
  3. Julian M Bass, Beecham Sarah, Mohammed Abdur Razzak, and John Noll. 2018. Employee retention and turnover in global software development: comparing in-house oshoring and oshore outsourcing. In 2018 IEEE/ACM 13th Int'l Conf. on Global Software Engineering (ICGSE). IEEE, 77-86.
  4. Amiangshu Bosu and Kazi Zakia Sultana. 2019. Diversity and inclusion in open source software (OSS) projects: Where do we stand?. In 2019 ACM/IEEE International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement (ESEM). IEEE, 1-11.
  5. Frederick P Brooks Jr. 1995. The mythical man-month (anniversary ed.). (1995).
  6. Gemma Catolino, Fabio Palomba, Damian A Tamburri, Alexander Serebrenik, and Filomena Ferrucci. 2019. Gender diversity and women in software teams: How do they aect community smells?. In 2019 IEEE/ACM 41st International Conference on Software Engineering: Software Engineering in Society (ICSE-SEIS). IEEE, 11-20.
  7. Derek Clements-Croome. 2006. Creating the productive workplace. Taylor & Francis.
  8. Jailton Coelho and Marco Tulio Valente. 2017. Why modern open source projects fail. In Proceedings of the 2017 11th Joint Meeting on Foundations of Software Engineering. 186-196.
  9. Kevin Crowston, James Howison, and Hala Annabi. 2006. Information systems success in free and open source software development: Theory and measures. Software Process: Improvement and Practice 11, 2 (2006), 123-148.
  10. Davor Cubranic, Gail C Murphy, Janice Singer, and Kellogg S Booth. 2005. Hipikat: A project memory for software development. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 31, 6 (2005), 446-465.
  11. Laura Dabbish, Colleen Stuart, Jason Tsay, and Jim Herbsleb. 2012. Social coding in GitHub: transparency and collaboration in an open software repository. In Proceedings of the ACM 2012 conference on computer supported cooperative work. 1277-1286.
  12. Nicolas Ducheneaut. 2005. Socialization in an open source software community: A socio-technical analysis. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) 14, 4 (2005), 323-368.
  13. J. C. Duenas, H. A. Parada G., F. Cuadrado, M. Santillán, and J. L. Ruiz. 2007. Apache and Eclipse: Comparing Open Source Project Incubators. IEEE Software 24, 6 (2007), 90-98. https://doi.org/10.1109/MS.2007.157 · DOI
  14. Carolyn D Egelman, Emerson Murphy-Hill, Elizabeth Kammer, Maggie Morrow Hodges, Collin Green, Ciera Jaspan, and James Lin. 2020. Pushback: Characterizing and Detecting Negative Interpersonal Interactions in Code Review.
  15. Omar Elazhary, Margaret-Anne Storey, Neil Ernst, and Andy Zaidman. 2019. Do as I Do, Not as I Say: Do Contribution Guidelines Match the GitHub Contribution Process?. In 2019 IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance and Evolution (ICSME). IEEE, 286-290.
  16. Joseph Feller, Patrick Finnegan, Björn Lundell, and Olof Nilsson. 2008. The servicitization of peer production: Reections on the open source software experience. In Information technology in the service economy: Challenges and possibilities for the 21st century. Springer, 353-355.
  17. Chaim Fershtman and Neil Gandal. 2007. Open source software: Motivation and restrictive licensing. International Economics and Economic Policy 4, 2 (2007), 209-225.
  18. Anna Filippova and Hichang Cho. 2015. Mudslinging and manners: Unpacking conict in free and open source software. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing. 1393-1403.
  19. Anna Filippova and Hichang Cho. 2016. The eects and antecedents of conict in free and open source software development. In Proceedings of the 19th ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing. 705-716.
  20. Brian Fitzgerald. 2006. The transformation of open source software. MIS quarterly 30, 3 (2006), 587-598.
  21. Denae Ford, Mahnaz Behroozi, Alexander Serebrenik, and Chris Parnin. 2019. Beyond the code itself: how program- mers really look at pull requests. In 2019 IEEE/ACM 41st International Conference on Software Engineering: Software Engineering in Society (ICSE-SEIS). IEEE, 51-60.
  22. Denae Ford, Justin Smith, Philip J Guo, and Chris Parnin. 2016. Paradise unplugged: Identifying barriers for female participation on stack overow. In Proceedings of the 2016 24th ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Foundations of Software Engineering. 846-857.
  23. Andrea Forte and Cli Lampe. 2013. Dening, understanding, and supporting open collaboration: Lessons from the literature. American Behavioral Scientist 57, 5 (2013), 535-547.
  24. Matthieu Foucault, Marc Palyart, Xavier Blanc, Gail C Murphy, and Jean-Rémy Falleri. 2015. Impact of developer turnover on quality in open-source software. In Proc. of the 2015 10th Joint Meeting on Foundations of Software Engineering. ACM, 829-841.
  25. Andrew N. Garman, Josie Corbett, Jane Grady, and Julie Benesh. 2005. Ready-to-use-simulation: THE HIDDEN COSTS OF EMPLOYEE TURNOVER. Simulation & Gaming 36, 2 (2005), 274-281. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046878104273254 · DOI
  26. Svetla Georgieva and George Allan. 2008. Best Practices in Project Management Through a Grounded Theory Lens. Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods 6, 1 (2008).
  27. Matt Germonprez, Georg JP Link, Kevin Lumbard, and Sean Goggins. 2018. Eight observations and 24 research questions about open source projects: illuminating new realities. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 2, CSCW (2018), 1-22.
  28. Marco Gerosa, Igor Wiese, Bianca Trinkenreich, Georg Link, Gregorio Robles, Christoph Treude, Igor Steinmacher, and Anita Sarma. 2021. The Shifting Sands of Motivation: Revisiting What Drives Contributors in Open Source. In Proceedings of the 43rd International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE).
  29. Georgios Gousios, Margaret-Anne Storey, and Alberto Bacchelli. 2016. Work practices and challenges in pull-based development: the contributor's perspective. In 2016 IEEE/ACM 38th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE). IEEE, 285-296.
  30. Michelle I Graef and Erick L Hill. 2000. Costing Child Protective Services Sta Turnover. Child Welfare 79, 5 (2000).
  31. Jonathan Grudin. 1994. Computer-supported cooperative work: history and focus. Computer 27, 5 (1994), 19-26.
  32. Jonathan Grudin. 1994. Groupware and social dynamics: Eight challenges for developers. Commun. ACM 37, 1 (1994), 92-105.
  33. Aaron Halfaker and R Stuart Geiger. 2020. Ores: Lowering barriers with participatory machine learning in wikipedia. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 4, CSCW2 (2020), 1-37.
  34. Aaron Halfaker, Aniket Kittur, and John Riedl. 2011. Don't bite the newbies: how reverts aect the quantity and quality of Wikipedia work. In Proceedings of the 7th international symposium on wikis and open collaboration. 163-172.
  35. Tracy Hall, Sarah Beecham, June Verner, and David Wilson. 2008. The impact of sta turnover on software projects: the importance of understanding what makes software practitioners tick. In Proc. of the 2008 ACM SIGMIS CPR Conf. on Computer personnel doctoral consortium and research. ACM, 30-39.
  36. Christoph Hannebauer, Matthias Book, and Volker Gruhn. 2014. An exploratory study of contribution barriers experienced by newcomers to open source software projects. In Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on CrowdSourcing in Software Engineering. 11-14.
  37. Christoph Hannebauer and Volker Gruhn. 2017. On the relationship between newcomer motivations and contribution barriers in open source projects. In Proceedings of the 13th International Symposium on Open Collaboration. 1-10.
  38. Gary Hsieh, Youyang Hou, Ian Chen, and Khai N. Truong. 2013. "Welcome!": Social and Psychological Predictors of Volunteer Socializers in Online Communities. In Proceedings of the 2013 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW '13). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 827-838. https://doi.org/10.1145/2441776.2441870 · DOI
  39. Carlos Jensen, Scott King, and Victor Kuechler. 2011. Joining Free/Open Source Software Communities: An Analysis of Newbies' First Interactions on Project Mailing Lists. In Proceedings of the 2011 44th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS '11). IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA, 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1109/HICSS. 2011.264 · DOI
  40. Corey Jergensen, Anita Sarma, and Patrick Wagstrom. 2011. The onion patch: migration in open source ecosystems. In Proceedings of the 19th ACM SIGSOFT symposium and the 13th European conference on Foundations of software engineering. ACM, 70-80.
  41. Elisabeth Joyce and Robert E Kraut. 2006. Predicting continued participation in newsgroups. Journal of Computer- Mediated Communication 11, 3 (2006), 723-747.
  42. Ralph Katz. 1982. The eects of group longevity on project communication and performance. Administrative science quarterly (1982), 81-104.
  43. Cli Lampe and Erik Johnston. 2005. Follow the (slash) dot: eects of feedback on new members in an online community. In Proceedings of the 2005 international ACM SIGGROUP conference on Supporting group work. 11-20.
  44. Amanda Lee and Jerey Carver. 2019. FLOSS Participants' Perceptions about Gender and Inclusiveness: A Survey. In 41st International Conference on Software Engineering.
  45. Amanda Lee, Jerey C Carver, and Amiangshu Bosu. 2017. Understanding the impressions, motivations, and barriers of one time code contributors to FLOSS projects: a survey. In 2017 IEEE/ACM 39th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE). IEEE, 187-197.
  46. Charlotte P Lee and Drew Paine. 2015. From The Matrix to a Model of Coordinated Action (MoCA) A Conceptual Framework of and for CSCW. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM conference on computer supported cooperative work & social computing. 179-194.
  47. Patrick Chang Boon Lee. 2002. The social context of turnover among information technology professionals. In Proc. of the 2002 ACM SIGCPR Conf. on Computer personnel research. ACM, 145-153.
  48. Saerom Lee, Hyunmi Baek, and Jungjoo Jahng. 2017. Governance strategies for open collaboration: Focusing on resource allocation in open source software development organizations. International Journal of Information Management 37, 5 (2017), 431-437.
  49. John M Levine and Hoon-Seok Choi. 2004. Impact of personnel turnover on team performance and cognition. In Team cognition: Understanding the factors that drive process and performance, E. Salas and S.M. Fioren (Eds.). American Psychological Association, 153--176.
  50. Sheen S Levine and Michael J Prietula. 2014. Open collaboration for innovation: Principles and performance. Organization Science 25, 5 (2014), 1414-1433.
  51. Bin Lin, Gregorio Robles, and Alexander Serebrenik. 2017. Developer turnover in global, industrial open source projects: Insights from applying survival analysis. In 2017 IEEE 12th International Conference on Global Software Engineering (ICGSE). IEEE, 66-75.
  52. Glenn Littlepage, William Robison, and Kelly Reddington. 1997. Eects of Task Experience and Group Experience on Group Performance, Member Ability, and Recognition of Expertise. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 69, 2 (1997), 133 -147. https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.1997.2677 · DOI
  53. Hanna Mäenpää, Simo Mäkinen, Terhi Kilamo, Tommi Mikkonen, Tomi Männistö, and Paavo Ritala. 2018. Organizing for openness: six models for developer involvement in hybrid OSS projects. Journal of Internet Services and Applications 9, 1 (2018), 17.
  54. Raghvendra Mall, Mridul Nagpal, Joni Salminen, Hind Almerekhi, Soon-Gyo Jung, and Bernard J Jansen. 2020. Four Types of Toxic People: Characterizing Online Users' Toxicity over Time. In Proceedings of the 11th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction: Shaping Experiences, Shaping Society. 1-11.
  55. A Mani and Rebeka Mukherjee. 2016. A study of FOSS 2013 survey data using clustering techniques. In 2016 IEEE International WIE Conference on Electrical and Computer Engineering (WIECON-ECE). IEEE, 118-121.
  56. Christopher Mendez, Hema Susmita Padala, Zoe Steine-Hanson, Claudia Hilderbrand, Amber Horvath, Charles Hill, Logan Simpson, Nupoor Patil, Anita Sarma, and Margaret Burnett. 2018. Open source barriers to entry, revisited: A sociotechnical perspective. In Proceedings of the 40th International Conference on Software Engineering. 1004-1015.
  57. Sharan B Merriam and Elizabeth J Tisdell. 2015. Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. John Wiley & Sons.
  58. Sharan B Merriam and Elizabeth J Tisdell. 2015. Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. John Wiley & Sons.
  59. Audris Mockus. 2009. Succession: Measuring transfer of code and developer productivity. In Proc. of the 31st Int'l Conf. on Software Engineering. IEEE Computer Society, 67-77.
  60. Audris Mockus. 2010. Organizational volatility and its eects on software defects. In Proc. of the eighteenth ACM SIGSOFT Int'l symposium on Foundations of software engineering. ACM, 117-126.
  61. Mark Mortensen and Pamela J Hinds. 2001. CONFLICT & SHARED IDENTITY IN GEOGRAPHICALLY DISTRIBUTED TEAMS.. In Academy of Management Proceedings, Vol. 2001. Academy of Management Briarcli Manor, NY 10510, B1-B6.
  62. David R. Musicant, Yuqing Ren, James A. Johnson, and John Riedl. 2011. Mentoring in Wikipedia: A Clash of Cultures. In Proceedings of the 7th International Symposium on Wikis and Open Collaboration (WikiSym '11). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 173-182. https://doi.org/10.1145/2038558.2038586 · DOI
  63. Robbie T Nakatsu and Charalambos L Iacovou. 2009. A comparative study of important risk factors involved in oshore and domestic outsourcing of software development projects: A two-panel Delphi study. Information & Management 46, 1 (2009), 57-68.
  64. Shaul Oreg and Oded Nov. 2008. Exploring motivations for contributing to open source initiatives: The roles of contribution context and personal values. Computers in human behavior 24, 5 (2008), 2055-2073.
  65. Susmita Hema Padala, Christopher John Mendez, Luiz Felipe Dias, Igor Steinmacher, Zoe Steine Hanson, Claudia Hilderbrand, Amber Horvath, Charles Hill, Logan Dale Simpson, Margaret Burnett, et al. 2020. How Gender-biased Tools Shape Newcomer Experiences in OSS Projects. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering (2020).
  66. Rajshakhar Paul, Amiangshu Bosu, and Kazi Zakia Sultana. 2019. Expressions of sentiments during code reviews: Male vs. female. In 2019 IEEE 26th International Conference on Software Analysis, Evolution and Reengineering (SANER). IEEE, 26-37.
  67. Lawrence Peters. 2003. Managing software professionals. In IEMC'03 Proceedings. Managing Technologically Driven Organizations: The Human Side of Innovation and Change. IEEE, 61-66.
  68. Gustavo Pinto, Igor Steinmacher, and Marco Aurélio Gerosa. 2016. More common than you think: An in-depth study of casual contributors. In 2016 IEEE 23rd International Conference on Software Analysis, Evolution, and Reengineering (SANER), Vol. 1. IEEE, 112-123.
  69. Gede Artha Azriadi Prana, Denae Ford, Ayushi Rastogi, David Lo, Rahul Purandare, and Nachiappan Nagappan. 2020. Including Everyone, Everywhere: Understanding Opportunities and Challenges of Geographic Gender-Inclusion in OSS. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology (TOSEM) (2020).
  70. Ayushi Rastogi, Nachiappan Nagappan, Georgios Gousios, and André van der Hoek. 2018. Relationship between geographical location and evaluation of developer contributions in github. In Proceedings of the 12th ACM/IEEE International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement. 1-8.
  71. Eric Raymond. 1999. The cathedral and the bazaar. Knowledge, Technology & Policy 12, 3 (1999), 23-49.
  72. Ruqin Ren and Bei Yan. 2017. Crowd diversity and performance in Wikipedia: The mediating eects of task conict and communication. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 6342-6351.
  73. Yuqing Ren, Jilin Chen, and John Riedl. 2016. The impact and evolution of group diversity in online open collaboration. Management Science 62, 6 (2016), 1668-1686.
  74. Gregorio Robles, Igor Steinmacher, Paul Adams, and Christoph Treude. 2019. Twenty Years of Open Source Software: From Skepticism to Mainstream. IEEE Software 36, 6 (2019), 12-15.
  75. Rien Sach, Helen Sharp, and Marian Petre. 2011. Software engineers' perceptions of factors in motivation: The work, people, obstacles. In 2011 International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement. IEEE, 368-371.
  76. Sonali K Shah. 2006. Motivation, governance, and the viability of hybrid forms in open source software development. Management science 52, 7 (2006), 1000-1014.
  77. Jeerson Silva, Igor Wiese, Daniel German, Christoph Treude, Marco Gerosa, and Igor Steinmacher. 2020. A Theory of the Engagement in Open Source Projects via Summer of Code Programs. In Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering (FSE 2020) (FSE '20).
  78. Igor Steinmacher, Ana Paula Chaves, Tayana Conte, and Marco Aurélio Gerosa. 2014. Preliminary empirical iden- tication of barriers faced by newcomers to Open Source Software projects.. In Proceedings of the 28th Brazilian Symposium on Software Engineering (SBES '14). IEEE Computer Society, 51-60.
  79. Igor Steinmacher, Tayana Conte, and Marco Aurélio Gerosa. 2015. Understanding and Supporting the Choice of an Appropriate Task to Start With In Open Source Software Communities. In 2015 48th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS '15). IEEE, 5299-5308.
  80. Igor Steinmacher, Tayana Conte, Marco Aurélio Gerosa, and David Redmiles. 2015. Social barriers faced by newcomers placing their rst contribution in open source software projects. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work & social computing. 1379-1392.
  81. Igor Steinmacher, Tayana Uchoa Conte, Christoph Treude, and Marco Aurélio Gerosa. 2016. Overcoming open source project entry barriers with a portal for newcomers. In Proceedings of the 38th International Conference on Software Engineering. 273-284.
  82. Igor Steinmacher, Gustavo Pinto, Igor Scaliante Wiese, and Marco Aurélio Gerosa. 2018. Almost there: A study on quasi-contributors in open-source software projects. In 2018 IEEE/ACM 40th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE). IEEE, 256-266.
  83. Igor Steinmacher, Gregorio Robles, Brian Fitzgerald, and Anthony Wasserman. 2017. Free and open source software development: the end of the teenage years. Journal of Internet Services and Applications 8, 1 (05 Dec 2017), 17. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13174-017-0069-9 · DOI
  84. Igor Steinmacher, Marco Aurelio Graciotto Silva, Marco Aurelio Gerosa, and David F Redmiles. 2015. A systematic literature review on the barriers faced by newcomers to open source software projects. Information and Software Technology 59 (2015), 67-85.
  85. Igor Steinmacher, Marco Aurélio Graciotto Silva, Marco Aurélio Gerosa, and David F. Redmiles. 2015. A systematic literature review on the barriers faced by newcomers to open source software projects. Information and Software Technology 59 (March 2015), 67-85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2014.11.001 · DOI
  86. Igor Steinmacher, Christoph Treude, and Marco Aurelio Gerosa. 2018. Let me in: Guidelines for the successful onboarding of newcomers to open source projects. IEEE Software 36, 4 (2018), 41-49.
  87. Igor Steinmacher, Igor Wiese, Ana Paula Chaves, and Marco Aurélio Gerosa. 2013. Why do newcomers abandon open source software projects?. In 2013 6th International Workshop on Cooperative and Human Aspects of Software Engineering (CHASE). IEEE, 25-32.
  88. Igor Steinmacher, Igor Scaliante Wiese, and Marco Aurélio Gerosa. 2012. Recommending mentors to software project newcomers. In Proceedings of the Third International Workshop on Recommendation Systems for Software Engineering (RSSE '12). IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA, 63-67. https://doi.org/10.1109/RSSE.2012.6233413 · DOI
  89. Bongwon Suh, Gregorio Convertino, Ed H Chi, and Peter Pirolli. 2009. The singularity is not near: slowing growth of Wikipedia. In Proceedings of the 5th International Symposium on Wikis and Open Collaboration. 1-10.
  90. Wikan Sunindyo, Thomas Moser, Dietmar Winkler, and Deepak Dhungana. 2012. Improving open source software process quality based on defect data mining. In International Conference on Software Quality. Springer, 84-102.
  91. Marcin Sydow, Katarzyna Baraniak, and Paweł Teisseyre. 2017. Diversity of editors and teams versus quality of cooperative work: experiments on Wikipedia. Journal of Intelligent Information Systems 48, 3 (2017), 601-632.
  92. Bianca Trinkenreich, Mariam Guizani, Igor Wiese, Anita Sarma, and Igor Steinmacher. 2020. Hidden Figures: Roles and Pathways of Successful OSS Contributors. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 4, CSCW2 (2020), 1-22.
  93. Bogdan Vasilescu, Daryl Posnett, Baishakhi Ray, Mark GJ van den Brand, Alexander Serebrenik, Premkumar Devanbu, and Vladimir Filkov. 2015. Gender and tenure diversity in GitHub teams. In Proceedings of the 33rd annual ACM conference on human factors in computing systems. 3789-3798.
  94. Bogdan Vasilescu, Alexander Serebrenik, and Vladimir Filkov. 2015. A data set for social diversity studies of GitHub teams. In 2015 IEEE/ACM 12th working conference on mining software repositories. IEEE, 514-517.
  95. Georg Von Krogh, Stefan Haeiger, Sebastian Spaeth, and Martin W Wallin. 2012. Carrots and rainbows: Motivation and social practice in open source software development. MIS quarterly (2012), 649-676.
  96. Claudia Wagner, David Garcia, Mohsen Jadidi, and Markus Strohmaier. 2015. It's a man's Wikipedia? Assessing gender inequality in an online encyclopedia. In Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media, Vol. 9.
  97. Claudia Wagner, Eduardo Graells-Garrido, David Garcia, and Filippo Menczer. 2016. Women through the glass ceiling: gender asymmetries in Wikipedia. EPJ Data Science 5 (2016), 1-24.
  98. Jianguo Wang and Anita Sarma. 2011. Which bug should I x: helping new developers onboard a new project. In Proceedings of the 4th International Workshop on Cooperative and Human Aspects of Software Engineering. 76-79.
  99. P Warr. 1998. What is our current understanding of the relationships between well-being and work. Journal of Occupational Psychology 63 (1998), 193-210.
  100. Vincent Wol-Marting, Christoph Hannebauer, and Volker Gruhn. 2013. Patterns for tearing down contribution barriers to FLOSS projects. In 2013 IEEE 12th International Conference on Intelligent Software Methodologies, Tools and Techniques (SoMeT). IEEE, 9-14.
  101. Pavlina Wurzelová, Fabio Palomba, and Alberto Bacchelli. 2019. Characterizing women (not) contributing to open- source. In 2019 IEEE/ACM 2nd International Workshop on Gender Equality in Software Engineering (GE). IEEE, 5-8.
  102. Kazuhiro Yamashita, Yasutaka Kamei, Shane McIntosh, Ahmed E Hassan, and Naoyasu Ubayashi. 2016. Magnet or sticky? Measuring project characteristics from the perspective of developer attraction and retention. Journal of Information Processing 24, 2 (2016), 339-348.
  103. Murat Yilmaz and Rory V O'Connor. 2011. A software process engineering approach to improving software team productivity using socioeconomic mechanism design. ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes 36, 5 (2011), 1-5.
  104. Yiqing Yu, Alexander Benlian, and Thomas Hess. 2012. An empirical study of volunteer members' perceived turnover in open source software projects. In 2012 45th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. IEEE, 3396-3405.
  105. Minghui Zhou and Audris Mockus. 2010. Developer uency: Achieving true mastery in software projects. In Proceedings of the eighteenth ACM SIGSOFT international symposium on Foundations of software engineering. 137-146.
  106. Minghui Zhou, Audris Mockus, Xiujuan Ma, Lu Zhang, and Hong Mei. 2016. Inow and retention in oss communities with commercial involvement: A case study of three hybrid projects. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology (TOSEM) 25, 2 (2016), 1-29.
  107. Haiyi Zhu, Amy Zhang, Jiping He, Robert E Kraut, and Aniket Kittur. 2013. Eects of peer feedback on contribution: a eld experiment in Wikipedia. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 2253-2262. Received January 2021; revised April 2021; accepted July 2021

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Guizani, M., Chatterjee, A., Trinkenreich, B., May, M. E., Noa-Guevara, G. J., Russell, L. J., Cuevas Zambrano, G. G., Izquierdo-Cortazar, D., Steinmacher, I., Gerosa, M. A., & Sarma, A.
Affiliations
  • Oregon State University (US)
  • Northern Arizona University (US)
  • Corvallis High School, Corvallis, OR, USA
  • Apache Software Foundation, Wakefield, MA, USA
  • Bitergia, Madrid, Spain
ORCID
Venue
Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction
Publisher
Association for Computing Machinery (ACM)
Published
2021-10-13
Volume
5
Issue
CSCW2
Pages
1-30
ISSN
2573-0142 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1145/3479551
OpenAlex
W3205330424
Cited by
39
References
8
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 5 · 2018: 1
FWCI
2.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
www.acm.org/publications/policies/copyright_policy#Background (vor)
Locations
Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • NSF (1815486 1815503 1900903 and 1901031)
  • CNPq (#313067/2020-1)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Open Source Software Innovations
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Software Engineering Techniques and Practices
  • Social Sciences › Communication › Wikis in Education and Collaboration
Keywords
open source software, Apache Software Foundation, diversity and inclusion, community strategies

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review