A Longitudinal Study of Community-Oriented Open Source Software Development

  • Kateryna NeulingerEmail author
  • Anna Hannemann
  • Ralf Klamma
  • Matthias Jarke
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9694)


End-users are often argued to be the source of innovation in Open Source Software (OSS). However, most of the existing empirical studies about OSS projects have been restricted to developer sub-communities only. In this paper, we address the question, if and under which conditions the requirements and ideas from end-users indeed influence the development processes in OSS. We present an approach for automated requirements elicitation process discovery in OSS communities. The empirical basis are three large-scale interdisciplinary OSS projects in bioinformatics, focusing on communication in the mailing lists and source code histories over ten years. Our study results in preliminary guidelines for the organization of community-oriented software development.


Requirements engineering End-user development Open source software 


  1. 1.
    Alexander, I.: Migrating towards co-operative requirements engineering. Comput. Control Eng. J. 10(1), 17–22 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bhowmik, T., Reddivari, S.: Resolution trend of just-in-time requirements in open source software development. In: Just In Time RE Workshop, Canada (2015)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Boehm, B., Grünbacher, P., Briggs, R.: Developing groupware for requirements negotiation: lessons learned. IEEE Softw. 18(3), 46–55 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chesbrough, W.: Open Innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Technology. Harvard Business School Press, Boston (2003)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cock, P., Antao, T., Chang, J., Chapman, B., Cox, C., Dalke, A., Friedberg, I., Hamelryck, T., Kauff, F., Wilczynski, B., de Hoon, M.: Biopython: freely available python tools for computational molecular biology and bioinformatics. Bioinformatics 25(11), 1422–1423 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Crowston, K., Howison, J.: Hierarchy and centralization in free and open source software team communications. Knowl. Technol. Policy 18, 65–85 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Crowston, K., Wei, K., Li, Q., Howison, J.: Core and periphery in free/libre and open source software team communications. In: Proceedings of the 39th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, HICSS 2006. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, D.C. (2006)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ernst, A., Murphy, C.: Case studies in just-in-time requirements analysis. In: Proceedings of the Second IEEE International Workshop on Empirical Requirements Engineering (EmpiRE), pp. 25–32 (2012)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hannemann, A., Hackstein, M., Klamma, R., Jarke, M.: An adaptive filter-framework for the quality improvement of open-source software analysis. In: Kowalewski, S., Rumpe, B. (eds.) Software Engineering. LNI, vol. 213, pp. 143–156. GI (2013)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hannemann, A., Klamma, R.: Community dynamics in open source software projects: aging and social reshaping. In: Petrinja, E., Succi, G., El Ioini, N., Sillitti, A. (eds.) OSS 2013. IFIP AICT, vol. 404, pp. 80–96. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hannemann, A., Klamma, R., Jarke, M.: Soziale Interaktion in OSS. Praxis der Wirtschaftsinformatik (2012)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hauge, O., Ayala, C., Conradi, R.: Adoption of open source software in software-intensive organizations - a systematic literature review. Inf. Softw. Technol. 52(11), 1133–1154 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hippel, E.: Lead users: a source of novel product concepts. Manag. Sci. 32(7), 791–805 (1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hippel, E., Krogh, G.: Open source software and the “private-collective” innovation model: Issues for organization science. J. Organ. Sci. 14(2), 208–223 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Holland, R., Down, T., Pocock, M., Prlić, A., Huen, D., James, K., Foisy, S., Dräger, A., Yates, A., Heuer, M., Schreiber, M.J.: Biojava: an open-source framework for bioinformatics. Bioinformatics 24(18), 2096–2097 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Jensen, C., King, S., Kuechler, V.: Joining free/open source software communities: an analysis of newbies’ first interactions on project mailing lists. In: Proceedings of the 44th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS), pp. 1–10 (2011)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Klamma, R., Spaniol, M., Cao, Y.: MPEG-7 compliant community hosting. J. Univ. Knowl. Manag. 1(1), 36–44 (2006)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Land, S., Fischer, S.: Rapid Miner in Academic Use (2012)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lehman, M., Ramil, F., Wernick, D., Perry, E., Turski, M.: Metrics and laws of software evolution - the nineties view. In: Proceedings of the Fourth International Software Metrics Symposium, pp. 20–32 (1997)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lovell, C., Walder, C.: Support vector machines for business applications. In: Voges, K., Pope, N. (eds.) Business Applications and Computational Intelligence, pp. 267–290. IGI Global, Hershey (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Maiden, N., Jones, S., Karlsen, K., Neill, R., Zachos, K., Milne, A.: Requirements engineering as creative problem solving: a research agenda for idea finding. In: Proceedings of the 18th IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference, pp. 57–66 (2010)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Melville, P., Gryc, W., Lawrence, D.: Sentiment analysis of blogs by combining lexical knowledge with text classification. In: Proceedings of the 15th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, KDD 2009, pp. 1275–1284. ACM, New York (2009)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Pang, B., Lee, L.: Opinion mining and sentiment analysis. Found. Trends Inf. Retrieval 2(1–2), 1–135 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Pang, B., Lee, L., Vaithyanathan, S.: Thumbs up?: Sentiment classification using machine learning techniques. In: Proceedings of the ACL-02 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, EMNLP 2002, vol. 10, pp. 79–86. Association for Computational Linguistics, Stroudsburg (2002)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Raymond, E.: The Cathedral and the Bazaar. O’Reilly Media, New York (1999)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Robles, G., Gonzalez-Barahona, J.M.: Contributor turnover in libre software projects. In: Damiani, E., Fitzgerald, B., Scacchi, W., Scotto, M., Succi, G. (eds.) Open Source Systems, vol. 203, pp. 273–286. Springer, Boston (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Robles, G., Gonzalez-Barahona, J.M., Michlmayr, M.: Evolution of volunteer participation in libre software projects: evidence from debian. In: Scotto, M., Succi, G. (eds.) Proceedings of the First International Conference on Open Source Systems, pp. 100–107 (2005)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Scacchi, W.: Understanding requirements for open source software. In: Lyytinen, K., Loucopoulos, P., Mylopoulos, J., Robinson, B. (eds.) Design Requirements Engineering. LNBIP, vol. 14, pp. 467–494. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Scacchi, W.: The future research in free/open source software development. In: Proceedings of ACM Workshop on the Future of Software Engineering Research (FoSER), Santa Fe, NM, pp. 315–319 (2010)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Seyff, N., Graf, F., Maiden, N.: Using mobile re tools to give end-users their own voice. In: Proceedings of the 18th IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference, pp. 37–46 (2010)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Sowe, S.K.: Emerging Free and Open Source Software Practices. IGI Publishing, Hershey (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Stajich, E., Block, D., Boulez, K., Brenner, E., Chervitz, A., Dagdigian, C., Fuellen, G., Gilbert, J., Korf, I., Lapp, H., Lehvaslaiho, H., Matsalla, C., Mungall, C., Osborne, B., Pocock, M., Schattner, P., Senger, M., Stein, L., Stupka, E., Wilkinson, M., Birney, E.: The bioperl toolkit: Perl modules for the life sciences. Genome Res. 12(10), 1611–1618 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Sutcliffe, A.: Scenario-based requirements engineering. In: Proceedings of the 11th IEEE International Conference on Requirements Engineering, RE 2003, pp. 320–329. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, D.C. (2003)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Sutcliffe, A.: Evaluating the costs and benefits of end-user development. SIGSOFT Softw. Eng. Notes 30(4), 1–4 (2005)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Vlas, R., Robinson, W.N.: A rule-based natural language technique for requirements discovery and classification in open-source software development projects. In: Proceedings of the 44th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (2011)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Wiggins, A., Howison, J., Crowston, K.: Heartbeat: measuring active user base and potential user interest in FLOSS projects. In: Boldyreff, C., Crowston, K., Lundell, B., Wasserman, A.I. (eds.) OSS 2009. IFIP AICT, vol. 299, pp. 94–104. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Wulf, V., Jarke, M.: The economics of end-user development: tools that empower users to create their own software solutions. Commun. ACM 47(9), 41–42 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Ye, Y., Nakakoji, K., Yamamoto, Y., Kishida, K.: The co-evolution of systems and communities in free and open source software development. In: Koch, S. (ed.) Free/Open Source Software Development, pp. 59–82. Idea Group Publishing, Hershey (2004)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Zhang, H.: The optimality of naive bayes. In: Barr, V., Markov, Z. (eds.) FLAIRS Conference, pp. 562–567. AAAI Press, Miami Beach (2004)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kateryna Neulinger
    • 1
    Email author
  • Anna Hannemann
    • 1
  • Ralf Klamma
    • 1
  • Matthias Jarke
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Advanced Community Information Systems (ACIS) GroupRWTH Aachen UniversityAachenGermany
  2. 2.Fraunhofer FITSankt AugustinGermany

Personalised recommendations