Open source software projects often rely on code contributions from a wide variety of developers to extend the capabilities of their software. Project members evaluate these contributions and often engage in extended discussions to decide whether to integrate changes. These discussions have important implications for project management regarding new contributors and evolution of project requirements and direction. We present a study of how developers in open work environments evaluate and discuss pull requests, a primary method of contribution in GitHub, analyzing a sample of extended discussions around pull requests and interviews with GitHub developers. We found that developers raised issues around contributions over both the appropriateness of the problem that the submitter attempted to solve and the correctness of the implemented solution. Both core project members and third-party stakeholders discussed and sometimes implemented alternative solutions to address these issues. Different stakeholders also influenced the outcome of the evaluation by eliciting support from different communities such as dependent projects or even companies. We also found that evaluation outcomes may be more complex than simply acceptance or rejection. In some cases, although a submitter's contribution was rejected, the core team fulfilled the submitter's technical goals by implementing an alternative solution. We found that the level of a submitter's prior interaction on a project changed how politely developers discussed the contribution and the nature of proposed alternative solutions.
more »
« less
What the fork: a study of inefficient and efficient forking practices in social coding
Forking and pull requests have been widely used in open-source communities as a uniform development and contribution mechanism, giving developers the flexibility to modify their own fork without affecting others before attempting to contribute back. However, not all projects use forks efficiently; many experience lost and duplicate contributions and fragmented communities. In this paper, we explore how open-source projects on GitHub differ with regard to forking inefficiencies. First, we observed that different communities experience these inefficiencies to widely different degrees and interviewed practitioners to understand why. Then, using multiple regression modeling, we analyzed which context factors correlate with fewer inefficiencies.We found that better modularity and centralized management are associated with more contributions and a higher fraction of accepted pull requests, suggesting specific best practices that project maintainers can adopt to reduce forking-related inefficiencies in their communities.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1813598
- NSF-PAR ID:
- 10109926
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Proceedings of the 2019 27th ACM Joint Meeting on European Software Engineering Conference and Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 350 to 361
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Women are underrepresented in Open Source Software (OSS) projects, as a result of which, not only do women lose career and skill development opportunities, but the projects themselves suffer from a lack of diversity of perspectives. Practitioners and researchers need to understand more about the phenomenon; however, studies about women in open source are spread across multiple fields, including information systems, software engineering, and social science. This paper systematically maps, aggregates, and synthesizes the state-of-the-art on women’s participation in OSS. It focuses on women contributors’ representation and demographics, how they contribute, their motivations and challenges, and strategies employed by communities to attract and retain women. We identified 51 articles (published between 2000 and 2021) that investigated women’s participation in OSS. We found evidence in these papers about who are the women who contribute, what motivates them to contribute, what types of contributions they make, challenges they face, and strategies proposed to support their participation. According to these studies, only about 5% of projects were reported to have women as core developers, and women authored less than 5% of pull-requests, but had similar or even higher rates of pull request acceptances than men. Women make both code and non-code contributions and their motivations to contribute include, learning new skills, altruism, reciprocity, and kinship. Challenges that women face in OSS are mainly social, including lack of peer parity and non-inclusive communication from a toxic culture. We found ten strategies reported in the literature, which we mapped to the reported challenges. Based on these results, we provide guidelines for future research and practice.more » « less
-
Open source software is commonly portrayed as a meritocracy, where decisions are based solely on their technical merit. However, literature on open source suggests a complex social structure underlying the meritocracy. Social work environments such as GitHub make the relationships between users and between users and work artifacts transparent. This transparency enables developers to better use information such as technical value and social connections when making work decisions. We present a study on open source software contribution in GitHub that focuses on the task of evaluating pull requests, which are one of the primary methods for contributing code in GitHub. We analyzed the association of various technical and social measures with the likelihood of contribution acceptance. We found that project managers made use of information signaling both good technical contribution practices for a pull request and the strength of the social connection between the submitter and project manager when evaluating pull requests. Pull requests with many comments were much less likely to be accepted, moderated by the submitter's prior interaction in the project. Well-established projects were more conservative in accepting pull requests. These findings provide evidence that developers use both technical and social information when evaluating potential contributions to open source software projectsmore » « less
-
Unit testing focuses on verifying the functions of individual units of a software system. It is challenging due to the high inter dependencies among software units. Developers address this by mocking—replacing the dependency by a “fake” object. Despite the existence of powerful, dedicated mocking frameworks, developers often turn to a “hand-rolled” approach—inheritance. That is, they create a subclass of the dependent class and mock its behavior through method overriding. However, this requires tedious implementation and compromises the design quality of unit tests. This work contributes a fully automated refactoring framework to identify and replace the usage of inheritance by using Mockito—a well received mocking framework. Our approach is built upon the empirical experience from five open source projects that use inheritance for mocking. We evaluate our approach on nine other projects. Results show that our framework is efficient, generally applicable to new datasets, mostly preserves test case behaviors in detecting defects (in the form of mutants), and decouples test code from production code. The qualitative evaluation by experienced developers suggests that the auto-refactoring solutions generated by our framework improve the quality of the unit test cases in various aspects, such as making test conditions more explicit, as well as improved cohesion, readability, understandability, and maintainability with test cases. Finally, we submit 23 pull requests containing our refactoring solutions to the open-source projects. It turns out that, 9 requests are accepted/merged, 6 requests are rejected, the remaining requests are pending (5 requests), with unexpected exceptions (2 requests), or undecided (1 request). In particular, among the 21 open source developers that are involved in the reviewing process, 81% give positive votes. This indicates that our refactoring solutions are quite well received by the open-source projects and developers.more » « less
-
Developers in open source projects must make decisions on contributions from other community members, such as whether or not to accept a pull request. However, secondary factors—beyond the code itself—can influence those decisions. For example, signals from GitHub profiles, such as a number of followers, activity, names, or gender can also be considered when developers make decisions. In this paper, we examine how developers use these signals (or not) when making decisions about code contributions. To evaluate this question, we evaluate how signals related to perceived gender identity and code quality influenced decisions on accepting pull requests. Unlike previous work, we analyze this decision process with data collected from an eye-tracker. We analyzed differences in what signals developers said are important for themselves versus what signals they actually used to make decisions about others. We found that after the code snippet (x=57%), the second place programmers spent their time fixating on supplemental technical signals(x=32%), such as previous contributions and popular repositories. Diverging from what participants reported themselves, we also found that programmers fixated on social signals more than recalled.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Conference Paper:
- https://doi.org/10.1145/3338906.3338918
