Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Working Group on Health Measurement of Open Source Projects and Ecosystems
Utrecht Unievrsity, The Netherlands.
Johannes Kepler Universität Linz, Austria.
RISE - Research Institutes of Sweden, ICT, SICS.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-5157-8131
Athens University of Economics and Business, Greece.
2018 (English)In: Software Business, Platforms, and Ecosystems: Fundamentals of Software Production, 2018Conference paper, Oral presentation with published abstract (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

Open source projects and ecosystems can be studied due to the public availability of their data. The main reasons for studying this data is to collect operationalizable metrics that can be used for the improvement of the project or ecosystem. We can for instance use these metrics to do prediction, study adoption rates, and perform scenario modeling. Presently, in literature, the reigning health factors that are acknowledged are Robustness, Productivity, Niche creation. It is also common to look at ecosystem health from two dimensions: the partner/network level versus the system/project level. Each dimension provides a unique perspective on open source health and enables improvement in a different manner: one focuses on the activity within the platform, whereas the other focuses on the activity outside of it. Typically, in open source ecosystem health research the metrics are characterized along several axes: they are evaluated for availability, collectability, generalizability, comparability, user friendliness, etc. Examples of metrics are interactions between developers, clones, branches, and numbers of commits. We also find that metrics that are typically easy to collect are not very meaningful. Also, the need arises for a meaningful compact subset of metrics, instead of throwing the kitchen sink at evaluation projects. Also, we suspect that “typical” developer behaviors can be extracted from the correlations between different metrics. Finally, we find that the goal-question-metric approach is insufficiently employed in the study of the health of ecosystems. One of the bigger challenges in assessing ecosystem health is the myriad of perspectives on ecosystems. For instance, we can look at network health versus economic health. Furthermore, ecosystems themselves are made up of ecosystems, and we need to establish beforehand what the best manner is of decomposing an ecosystem.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2018.
National Category
Engineering and Technology
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:ri:diva-37632OAI: oai:DiVA.org:ri-37632DiVA, id: diva2:1283346
Conference
Dagstuhl Seminar 18182
Available from: 2019-01-29 Created: 2019-01-29 Last updated: 2019-02-05Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Authority records BETA

Papatheocharous, Efi

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Papatheocharous, Efi
By organisation
SICS
Engineering and Technology

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

urn-nbn

Altmetric score

urn-nbn
Total: 14 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
v. 2.35.7