Advertisement

A Social Networking Approach to F/OSS Quality Assessment

  • Anas Tawileh
  • Omer Rana
  • Steve McIntosh
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5322)

Abstract

With the growing number of available Free and Open Source Software (F/OSS) applications, choosing between them becomes increasingly difficult. The concept of “trust” in social networking has been successfully applied to facilitate choice in similar situations. We propose a social network-based approach to quality assessment and evaluation of F/OSS applications. The proposed system utilises the community formed around F/OSS projects to produce meaningful recommendations based on specific user preferences. We suggest that such an approach would overcome some of the difficulties complicating user choice by making useful suggestions and can fit seamlessly within the structure of the majority of F/OSS projects. The main focus of this work is on the end users of free and open source software and not on the developers of the software. The social network-based approach would apply differently to these different user classes.

Keywords

Social Networks Free and Open Source Software Quality Assessment Trust 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Raymond, E.S.: The Cathedral and the Bazaar (2000), http://www.catb.org/~esr/writings/cathedral-bazaar/cathedral-bazaar/ (accessed April 24, 2008)
  2. 2.
    Halloran, T.J., Scherlis, W.L.: High quality and open source software practices. In: Proceedings of 2nd Workshop on Open Source Software Engineering. ICSE, Orlando, USA, May 25 (2002)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Schmidt, D.C., Porter, A.: Leveraging open-source communities to improve the quality & performance of open-source software. In: Proceedings of the 1st Workshop on Open Source Software Engineering, Toronto, Canada, May 15 (2001)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Glass, R.: Is Open Source Software More Reliable? An Elusive Answer. The Software Practitioner 11(6) (2001)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Harrison, W.: Editorial: Open Source and Empirical Software Engineering. Empirical Software Engineering 6, 193–194 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Golden, B.: Succeeding with Open Source. Addison-Wesley, Boston (2005)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Michlmayr, M., Hunt, F., Probert, D.R.: Quality Practices and Problems in Free Software Projects. In: Proceedings of the First International Conference on Open Source Systems, Genova, Italy, July 11-15 (2005)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    International Standards Organisation (2002), http://www.iso.ch/iso/en/ISOOnline.frontpage (accessed April 24, 2008)
  9. 9.
    Juran, J.: Quality Control Handbook, 3rd edn. McGraw-Hill, New York (1979)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Crosby, P.B.: Quality is Free: The Art of Making Quality Certain. McGraw-Hill, New York (1979)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Michlmayr, M.: Software process maturity and the success of free software projects. In: Proceedings of the 7th Conference on Software Engineering, KKIO, Krakow, Poland, October 18-21 (2005)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Open Source Maturity Model (2003), http://www.navicasoft.com/pages/osmm.htm (accessed April 24, 2008)
  13. 13.
    Duijnhouwer, F.W., Widdows, C.: Capgemini Expert Letter Open Source Maturity Model, Capgemini (2003), http://pascal.case.unibz.it/retrieve/1097/ (accessed April 24, 2008)
  14. 14.
    Method for Qualification and Selection of Open Source software (QSOS) (2005), Atos Origin, http://www.qsos.org/ (accessed April 24, 2008)
  15. 15.
    Business Readiness Rating (2005), http://www.openbrr.org/ (accessed January 5, 2007)
  16. 16.
    Groot, A., Kugler, S., Adams, P., Gousios, G.: Call for Quality: Open Source Software Quality Observation. In: Proceedings of The Second International Conference on Open Source Systems, Como, Italy, June 8-10 (2006)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Tawileh, A., Rana, O.F., Ivins, W., McIntosh, S.: Managing Quality in the Free and Open Source Software Community. In: Proceedings of the 12th Americas Conference on Information Systems, Acapulco, Mexico, August 4-6 (2006)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Alshabib, H., Rana, O.F., Ali, A.S.: Deriving ratings through social network structures. In: Proceedings of the First International Conference on Availability, Reliability and Security (ARES 2006), Vienna, Austria, April 20-22 (2006)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Resnick, P., Iacovou, N., Suchak, M., Bergstrom, P., Riedl, J.: GroupLens: An open architecture for collaborative filtering of netnews. In: Proceedings of The ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work, Chicago, USA, November 6-10, 2004 (1994)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Wei, Y.Z., Moreau, L., Jennings, N.R.: Market-Based Recommendations: Design, Simulation and Evaluation. In: Proceedings of the 5th International Bi-Conference Workshop on Agent-Oriented Information Systems AOIS, Melbourne, Australia, July 14 (2003)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lang, K.: Newsweeder: Learning to filter netnews. In: Proceedings of the Twelfth International Conference on Machine Learning, Lake Tahoe, California, USA, July 9-12 (1995)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Pazzani, M., Billsus, D.: Learning and Revising User Profiles: The identification of interesting websites. Machine Learning 27, 313–331 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Goldberg, D., Nichols, D., Oki, B., Terry, D.: Using collaborative filtering to weave an information tapestry. Communications of the Association of Computing Machinery 35(12), 61–70 (1992)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hill, W., Stead, L., Rosenstein, M., Furnas, G.: Recommending and Evaluating Choices in a Virtual Community of Use. In: Proceedings of ACM CHI 1995, Denver, USA, May 7-11 (1995)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Nkweteyim, D.: A Collaborative Filtering Approach To Predict Web Pages Of Interest From Navigation Patterns Of Past Users Within An Academic Website. Ph.D Thesis, University of Pittsburgh (2005)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Massa, P., Bhattacharjee, B.: Using trust in Recommender Systems: an Experimental Analysis. In: Prococeedings of 2nd Int. Conference on Trust Management, Oxford, UK, March 29- April 1 (2004)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Crowston, K., Howison, J.: Assessing the Health of Open Source Communities. Computer 39(5), 89–91 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Allen, C., Appelcline, S.: Collective Choice: Experimenting with Ratings (2005), http://www.lifewithalacrity.com/ (accessed January 5, 2008)
  29. 29.
    Golbeck, J.: Computing and Applying Trust in Web-Based Social Networks, Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Maryland, College Park (2005)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Golbeck, J.: Personalizing Applications through Integration of Inferred Trust Values in Semantic Web-Based Social Networks. In: Proceedings of Semantic Network Analysis Workshop, Galway, Ireland, November 7 (2005)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    FilmTrust (2005), http://trust.mindswap.org/FilmTrust/ (accessed April 24, 2008)
  32. 32.
    Camp, L.J., Genkina, A. (2006), http://www.ljean.com/NetTrust/ (accessed April 24, 2008)
  33. 33.
    Massa, P., Bhattacharjee, B.: Using Trust in Recommender Systems: an Experimental Analysis. In: Jensen, C., Poslad, S., Dimitrakos, T. (eds.) iTrust 2004. LNCS, vol. 2995, pp. 221–235. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Wagstrom, P., Herbsleb, J., Carley, K.: A Social network approach to free/open source software simulation. In: Proceedings, First International Conference on Open Source Systems, Genoa, Italy (July 2005)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Gao, Y., Madey, G.: Network Analysis of the SourceForge.net Community. In: The Third International Conference on Open Source Systems (OSS 2007), IFIP WG 2.13, Limerick, Ireland (June 2007)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Anas Tawileh
    • 1
  • Omer Rana
    • 1
  • Steve McIntosh
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Computer ScienceCardiff UniversityCardiffUK

Personalised recommendations