Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]

skip to main content
10.1145/3368089.3409746acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesfseConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Open access

A first look at good first issues on GitHub

Published: 08 November 2020 Publication History

Abstract

Keeping a good influx of newcomers is critical for open source software projects' survival, while newcomers face many barriers to contributing to a project for the first time. To support newcomers onboarding, GitHub encourages projects to apply labels such as good first issue (GFI) to tag issues suitable for newcomers. However, many newcomers still fail to contribute even after many attempts, which not only reduces the enthusiasm of newcomers to contribute but makes the efforts of project members in vain. To better support the onboarding of newcomers, this paper reports a preliminary study on this mechanism from its application status, effect, problems, and best practices. By analyzing 9,368 GFIs from 816 popular GitHub projects and conducting email surveys with newcomers and project members, we obtain the following results. We find that more and more projects are applying this mechanism in the past decade, especially the popular projects. Compared to common issues, GFIs usually need more days to be solved. While some newcomers really join the projects through GFIs, almost half of GFIs are not solved by newcomers. We also discover a series of problems covering mechanism (e.g., inappropriate GFIs), project (e.g., insufficient GFIs) and newcomer (e.g., uneven skills) that makes this mechanism ineffective. We discover the practices that may address the problems, including identifying GFIs that have informative description and available support, and require limited scope and skill, etc. Newcomer onboarding is an important but challenging question in open source projects and our work enables a better understanding of GFI mechanism and its problems, as well as highlights ways in improving them.

Supplementary Material

Auxiliary Teaser Video (fse20main-p581-p-teaser.mp4)
Main Video
Auxiliary Presentation Video (fse20main-p581-p-video.mp4)
Main Video

References

[1]
Shaosong Ou Alexander Hars. 2002. Working for free? Motivations for participating in open-source projects. International journal of electronic commerce 6, 3 ( 2002 ), 25-39.
[2]
Mohammad Y. Allaho and Wang-Chien Lee. 2013. Analyzing the Social Ties and Structure of Contributors in Open Source Software Community. In Proceedings of the 2013 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 56-60.
[3]
J. Barlett. 2001. Organizational research: determining appropriate sample size in survey research. Information Technology, Learning, and Performance Journal 19 (01 2001 ), 43-50.
[4]
Shahab Bayati. 2019. Efect of Newcomers' Supportive Strategies on Open Source Projects Socio-Technical Activities. In 2019 IEEE/ACM 12th International Workshop on Cooperative and Human Aspects of Software Engineering (CHASE). IEEE, USA, 49-50.
[5]
Hoda Baytiyeh and Jay Pfafman. 2010. Volunteers in Wikipedia: Why the community matters. Journal of Educational Technology & Society 13, 2 ( 2010 ), 128-140.
[6]
Daniela S Cruzes and Tore Dyba. 2011. Recommended steps for thematic synthesis in software engineering. In 2011 international symposium on empirical software engineering and measurement. IEEE, USA, 275-284.
[7]
Donald Farrar and Robert Glauber. 1967. Multicollinearity in Regression Analysis: The Problem Revisited. The Review of Economics and Statistics 49 ( 02 1967 ), 92-107. https://doi.org/10.2307/1937887
[8]
J. Feller, B. Fitzgerald, S. A. Hissam, and K. R. huf. 2007. Why Hackers Do What They Do: Understanding Motivation and Efort in Free/Open Source Software Projects. MITP, USA, 3-21. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/6277090
[9]
Catherine O Fritz, Peter E Morris, and Jennifer J Richler. 2012. Efect size estimates: current use, calculations, and interpretation. Journal of experimental psychology: General 141, 1 ( 2012 ), 2.
[10]
Georgios Gousios. 2013. The GHTorrent dataset and tool suite. In Proceedings of the 10th Working Conference on Mining Software Repositories. IEEE Press, Piscataway, NJ, USA, 233-236.
[11]
Pieter Hooimeijer and Westley Weimer. 2007. Modeling Bug Report Quality. In Proceedings of the Twenty-Second IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 34-43.
[12]
Yonghui Huang, Daniel Costa, Feng Zhang, and Ying Zou. 2018. An empirical study on the issue reports with questions raised during the issue resolving process. Empirical Software Engineering 24 (08 2018 ). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10664-018-9636-3
[13]
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 2011 44th Hawaii international conference on system sciences. IEEE, USA, 1-10.
[14]
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, USA, 70-80.
[15]
Eirini Kalliamvakou, Georgios Gousios, Kelly Blincoe, Leif Singer, Daniel M German, and Daniela Damian. 2014. The promises and perils of mining GitHub. In Proceedings of the 11th working conference on mining software repositories. ACM, USA, 92-101.
[16]
Riivo Kikas, Marlon Dumas, and Dietmar Pfahl. 2016. Using dynamic and contextual features to predict issue lifetime in GitHub projects. In 2016 IEEE/ACM 13th Working Conference on Mining Software Repositories (MSR). IEEE, USA, 291-302.
[17]
Robert E Kraut and Paul Resnick. 2012. Building successful online communities: Evidence-based social design. MIT Press, USA.
[18]
Rajiv Krishnamurthy, Varghese Jacob, Suresh Radhakrishnan, and Kutsal Dogan. 2016. Peripheral Developer Participation in Open Source Projects: An Empirical Analysis. ACM Trans. Manage. Inf. Syst. 6, 4, Article Article 14 ( Jan. 2016 ), 31 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/2820618
[19]
Amanda Lee, Jefrey C. Carver, and Amiangshu Bosu. 2017. Understanding the Impressions, Motivations, and Barriers of One Time Code Contributors to FLOSS Projects: A Survey. In Proceedings of the 39th International Conference on Software Engineering. IEEE Press, USA, 187-197.
[20]
Edward Loper and Steven Bird. 2002. NLTK: The Natural Language Toolkit. In Proceedings of the ACL-02 Workshop on Efective Tools and Methodologies for Teaching Natural Language Processing and Computational Linguistics. ACM, USA, 63-70.
[21]
Douglas R McCallum and James L Peterson. 1982. Computer-based readability indexes. In Proceedings of the ACM'82 Conference. ACM, USA, 44-48.
[22]
Shane McIntosh, Yasutaka Kamei, Bram Adams, and Ahmed E. Hassan. 2016. An empirical study of the impact of modern code review practices on software quality. Empirical Software Engineering 21, 5 ( 01 Oct 2016 ), 2146-2189. https: //doi.org/10.1007/s10664-015-9381-9
[23]
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. ACM, USA, 1004-1015.
[24]
Nuthan Munaiah, Steven Kroh, Craig Cabrey, and Meiyappan Nagappan. 2017. Curating GitHub for engineered software projects. Empirical Software Engineering 22, 6 ( 2017 ), 3219-3253.
[25]
Nadim Nachar et al. 2008. The Mann-Whitney U: A test for assessing whether two independent samples come from the same distribution. Tutorials in quantitative Methods for Psychology 4, 1 ( 2008 ), 13-20.
[26]
Sebastiano Panichella. 2015. Supporting newcomers in software development projects. In 2015 IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance and Evolution (ICSME). IEEE, USA, 586-589. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSM. 2015.7332519
[27]
Chao Ying Joanne Peng, Kuk Lida Lee, and Gary M. Ingersoll. 2002. An Introduction to Logistic Regression Analysis and Reporting. Journal of Educational Research 96, 1 ( 2002 ), 3-14.
[28]
Juan Ramos et al. 2003. Using tf-idf to determine word relevance in document queries. In Proceedings of the first instructional conference on machine learning, Vol. 242. Piscataway, NJ, USA, 133-142.
[29]
Sonali K. Shah. 2006. Motivation, Governance, and the Viability of Hybrid Forms in Open Source Software Development. Manage. Sci. 52, 7 ( July 2006 ), 1000-1014. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1060.0553
[30]
B. Shibuya and T. Tamai. 2009. Understanding the process of participating in open source communities. In 2009 ICSE Workshop on Emerging Trends in Free/Libre/Open Source Software Research and Development. ACM, USA, 1-6. https: //doi.org/10.1109/FLOSS. 2009.5071352
[31]
Emad Shihab, Ahmed E Hassan, Bram Adams, and Zhen Ming Jiang. 2012. An industrial study on the risk of software changes. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGSOFT 20th International Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering. ACM, USA, 1-11.
[32]
Igor Steinmacher, Ana Paula Chaves, Tayana Uchoa Conte, and Marco Aurelio Gerosa. 2014. Preliminary empirical identification of barriers faced by newcomers to Open Source Software projects. In 2014 Brazilian Symposium on Software Engineering. IEEE, USA, 51-60.
[33]
Igor Steinmacher and Marco Aurélio Gerosa. 2015. Understanding and Supporting the Choice of an Appropriate Task to Start With In Open Source Software Communities. In 48th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS-48). IEEE, USA, 5299-5308.
[34]
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 PP (01 2018 ), 1-1. https://doi.org/10.1109/MS. 2018.110162131
[35]
Xin Tan and Minghui Zhou. 2019. How to Communicate When Submitting Patches: An Empirical Study of the Linux Kernel. Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact. 3, CSCW, Article 108 ( Nov. 2019 ), 26 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/ 3359210
[36]
Jason Tsay, Laura Dabbish, and James Herbsleb. 2014. Influence of social and technical factors for evaluating contribution in GitHub. In Proceedings of the 36th international conference on Software engineering. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 356-366.
[37]
Georg Von Krogh, Stefan Haefliger, Sebastian Spaeth, and Martin W. Wallin. 2012. Carrots and Rainbows: Motivation and Social Practice in Open Source Software Development. MIS Q. 36, 2 ( June 2012 ), 649-676.
[38]
Georg Von Krogh and Eric Von Hippel. 2003. Special issue on open source software development.
[39]
Lev Vygotsky. 1978. Interaction between learning and development. Readings on the development of children 23, 3 ( 1978 ), 34-41.
[40]
Yunwen Ye and Kouichi Kishida. 2003. Toward an understanding of the motivation of open source software developers. In 25th International Conference on Software Engineering, 2003. Proceedings. IEEE Computer Society, USA, 419-429.
[41]
Minghui Zhou. 2019. Onboarding and Retaining of Contributors in FLOSS Ecosystem. In Towards Engineering Free/Libre Open Source Software ( FLOSS) Ecosystems for Impact and Sustainability. Springer, USA, 107-117.
[42]
Minghui Zhou and Audris Mockus. 2010. Developer fluency: Achieving true mastery in software projects. In Proceedings of the eighteenth ACM SIGSOFT international symposium on Foundations of software engineering. ACM, USA, 137-146.
[43]
Minghui Zhou and Audris Mockus. 2012. What make long term contributors: Willingness and opportunity in OSS community. In Proceedings of the 34th International Conference on Software Engineering. IEEE Press, USA, 518-528.

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Countering underproduction of peer produced goodsNew Media & Society10.1177/14614448241248139Online publication date: 16-May-2024
  • (2024)Open Source Software Digital SociologyProceedings of the 21st International Conference on Mining Software Repositories10.1145/3643991.3649105(743-744)Online publication date: 15-Apr-2024
  • (2024)How Are Paid and Volunteer Open Source Developers Different? A Study of the Rust ProjectProceedings of the IEEE/ACM 46th International Conference on Software Engineering10.1145/3597503.3639197(1-13)Online publication date: 20-May-2024
  • Show More Cited By

Recommendations

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences
ESEC/FSE 2020: Proceedings of the 28th ACM Joint Meeting on European Software Engineering Conference and Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering
November 2020
1703 pages
ISBN:9781450370431
DOI:10.1145/3368089
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Sponsors

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 08 November 2020

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. Good first issues
  2. Newcomers
  3. Onborading
  4. Open Source software

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Funding Sources

  • the National Natural Science Foundation of China Grant
  • the National key R&D Program of China Grant

Conference

ESEC/FSE '20
Sponsor:

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 112 of 543 submissions, 21%

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)630
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)77
Reflects downloads up to 28 Sep 2024

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Countering underproduction of peer produced goodsNew Media & Society10.1177/14614448241248139Online publication date: 16-May-2024
  • (2024)Open Source Software Digital SociologyProceedings of the 21st International Conference on Mining Software Repositories10.1145/3643991.3649105(743-744)Online publication date: 15-Apr-2024
  • (2024)How Are Paid and Volunteer Open Source Developers Different? A Study of the Rust ProjectProceedings of the IEEE/ACM 46th International Conference on Software Engineering10.1145/3597503.3639197(1-13)Online publication date: 20-May-2024
  • (2024)Characterizing Timeout Builds in Continuous IntegrationIEEE Transactions on Software Engineering10.1109/TSE.2024.338784050:6(1450-1463)Online publication date: Jun-2024
  • (2024)Understanding Newcomers’ Onboarding Process in Deep Learning ProjectsIEEE Transactions on Software Engineering10.1109/TSE.2024.335329750:3(443-460)Online publication date: Mar-2024
  • (2024)Visualizing the Synchronicity of Fixed Issues Across Diverse Ecosystems2024 International Conference on Smart Computing, IoT and Machine Learning (SIML)10.1109/SIML61815.2024.10578149(124-129)Online publication date: 6-Jun-2024
  • (2024)Leveraging IR based sequence and graph features for source-binary code alignment2024 4th International Conference on Neural Networks, Information and Communication (NNICE)10.1109/NNICE61279.2024.10499062(175-180)Online publication date: 19-Jan-2024
  • (2024)Guiding the way: A systematic literature review on mentoring practices in open source software projectsInformation and Software Technology10.1016/j.infsof.2024.107470171(107470)Online publication date: Jul-2024
  • (2023)A Systematic Mapping Study of the Onboarding Process in Software Development OrganizationsProceedings of the XXII Brazilian Symposium on Software Quality10.1145/3629479.3629500(11-20)Online publication date: 7-Nov-2023
  • (2023)Do CONTRIBUTING Files Provide Information about OSS Newcomers’ Onboarding Barriers?Proceedings of the 31st ACM Joint European Software Engineering Conference and Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering10.1145/3611643.3616288(16-28)Online publication date: 30-Nov-2023
  • Show More Cited By

View Options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Get Access

Login options

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media