Search for: All records

Hackathons have become popular events for teams to collaborate on projects and develop software prototypes. Most existing research focuses on activities during an event with limited attention to the evolution of the hackathon code.

We aim to understand the evolution of code used in and created during hackathon events, with a particular focus on the code blobs, specifically, how frequently hackathon teams reuse pre-existing code, how much new code they develop, if that code gets reused afterwards, and what factors affect reuse.

We collected information about 22,183 hackathon projects from Devpost and obtained related code blobs, authors, project characteristics, original author, code creation time, language, and size information from World of Code. We tracked the reuse of code blobs by identifying all commits containing blobs created during hackathons and identifying all projects that contain those commits. We also conducted a series of surveys in order to gain a deeper understanding of hackathon code evolution that we sent out to hackathon participants whose code was reused, whose code was not reused, and developers who reused some hackathon code.

9.14% of the code blobs in hackathon repositories and 8% of the lines of code (LOC) are created during hackathons and around a third of the hackathon code gets reused in other projects by both blob count and LOC. The number of associated technologies and the number of participants in hackathons increase reuse probability.

The results of our study demonstrates hackathons are not always “one-off” events as the common knowledge dictates and it can serve as a starting point for further studies in this area.

 

Background: Hackathons have become popular events for teams to collaborate on projects and develop software prototypes. Most existing research focuses on activities during an event with limited attention to the evolution of the code brought to or created during a hackathon. Aim: We aim to understand the evolution of hackathon-related code, specifically, how much hackathon teams rely on pre-existing code or how much new code they develop during a hackathon. Moreover, we aim to understand if and where that code gets reused, and what factors affect reuse. Method: We collected information about 22,183 hackathon projects from DEVPOST– a hackathon database – and obtained related code (blobs), authors, and project characteristics from the WORLD OF CODE. We investigated if code blobs in hackathon projects were created before, during, or after an event by identifying the original blob creation date and author, and also checked if the original author was a hackathon project member. We tracked code reuse by first identifying all commits containing blobs created during an event before determining all projects that contain those commits. Result: While only approximately 9.14% of the code blobs are created during hackathons, this amount is still significant considering time and member constraints of such events. Approximately a third of these code blobs get reused in other projects. The number of associated technologies and the number of participants in a project increase reuse probability. Conclusion: Our study demonstrates to what extent pre-existing code is used and new code is created during a hackathon and how much of it is reused elsewhere afterwards. Our findings help to better understand code reuse as a phenomenon and the role of hackathons in this context and can serve as a starting point for further studies in this area. 

ackground: Pull Request (PR) Integrators often face challenges in terms of multiple concurrent PRs, so the ability to gauge which of the PRs will get accepted can help them balance their workload. PR creators would benefit from knowing if certain characteristics of their PRs may increase the chances of acceptance. Aim: We modeled the probability that a PR will be accepted within a month after creation using a Random Forest model utilizing 50 predictors representing properties of the author, PR, and the project to which PR is submitted. Method: 483,988 PRs from 4218 popular NPM packages were analysed and we selected a subset of 14 predictors sufficient for a tuned Random Forest model to reach high accuracy. Result: An AUC-ROC value of 0.95 was achieved predicting PR acceptance. The model excluding PR properties that change after submission gave an AUC-ROC value of 0.89. We tested the utility of our model in practical scenarios by training it with historical data for the NPM package \textit{bootstrap} and predicting if the PRs submitted in future will be accepted. This gave us an AUC-ROC value of 0.94 with all 14 predictors, and 0.77 excluding PR properties that change after its creation. Conclusion: PR integrators can use our model for a highly accurate assessment of the quality of the open PRs and PR creators may benefit from the model by understanding which characteristics of their PRs may be undesirable from the integrators' perspective. The model can be implemented as a tool, which we plan to do as a future work 

GitHub projects can be easily replicated through the site's fork process or through a Git clone-push sequence. This is a problem for empirical software engineering, because it can lead to skewed results or mistrained machine learning models. We provide a dataset of 10.6 million GitHub projects that are copies of others, and link each record with the project's ultimate parent. The ultimate parents were derived from a ranking along six metrics. The related projects were calculated as the connected components of an 18.2 million node and 12 million edge denoised graph created by directing edges to ultimate parents. The graph was created by filtering out more than 30 hand-picked and 2.3 million pattern-matched clumping projects. Projects that introduced unwanted clumping were identified by repeatedly visualizing shortest path distances between unrelated important projects. Our dataset identified 30 thousand duplicate projects in an existing popular reference dataset of 1.8 million projects. An evaluation of our dataset against another created independently with different methods found a significant overlap, but also differences attributed to the operational definition of what projects are considered as related. 

The data collected from open source projects provide means to model large software ecosystems, but often suffer from data quality issues, specifically, multiple author identification strings in code commits might actually be associated with one developer. While many methods have been proposed for addressing this problem, they are either heuristics requiring manual tweaking, or require too much calculation time to do pairwise comparisons for 38M author IDs in, for example, the World of Code collection. In this paper, we propose a method that finds all author IDs belonging to a single developer in this entire dataset, and share the list of all author IDs that were found to have aliases. To do this, we first create blocks of potentially connected author IDs and then use a machine learning model to predict which of these potentially related IDs belong to the same developer. We processed around 38 million author IDs and found around 14.8 million IDs to have an alias, which belong to 5.4 million different developers, with the median number of aliases being 2 per developer. This dataset can be used to create more accurate models of developer behaviour at the entire OSS ecosystem level and can be used to provide a service to rapidly resolve new author IDs.