Two Evolution Indicators for FOSS Projects

  • Etiel Petrinja
  • Giancarlo Succi
Part of the IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology book series (IFIPAICT, volume 378)


In this paper we introduce two project evolution indicators. One is showing an increase of downloads of the project and therefore a growing interest of users in the results of the project. The second indicator is predicting the future evolution of the project with the submission of new revisions to the concurrent versioning system. Both indicators can provide evidence of the sustainability of a software project. We used the General Linear Model method to statistically formulate the two linear equations that can be used to predict the two indicators. The predicting equations were build by using two stratified data samples one of 760 projects and the second of 880 projects extracted from the SourceForge repository. The six metrics included into the final version of the two models were extracted from a set of thirty project and product metrics as: the number of downloads, the number of developers, etc. We have validated the discriminant and the concurrent validity of the two models by using different statistical tests as the goodness-of-fit and we have used the two models to predict the indicators on two hold-out validation samples. The model predicting the increment of downloads was correct in 75 percent of the cases, the model predicting the submission of new revisions was correct in 93 percent of the cases.


  1. 1.
    Kajan, E.: Information technology encyclopedia and acronyms. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Broy, M.: Software engineering – From auxiliary to key technologies. In: Broy, M., Denert, E. (eds.) Software Pioneers. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Che, M., Grellmann, W., Seidler, S.: Appl. Polym. Sci. 64, 1079–1090 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ross, D.W.: Lysosomes and storage diseases. MA Thesis, Columbia University, New York (1977)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Taibi, D., Lavazza, L., Morasca, S.: OpenBQR: A framework for the assessment of OSS. In: Open Source Software 2007, Limerick, Ireland (June 2007)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Petrinja, E., Nambakam, R., Sillitti, A.: Introducing the OpenSource Maturity Model. In: Workshop on Emerging Trends in Free/Libre/Open Source Software Research and Development collocated with 31st International Conference on Software Engineering, ICSE 2009, Vancouver, Canada, pp. 37–41 (2009)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Petrinja, E., Sillitti, A., Succi, G.: Comparing OpenBRR, QSOS, and OMM Assessment Models. In: Ågerfalk, P., Boldyreff, C., González-Barahona, J.M., Madey, G.R., Noll, J. (eds.) OSS 2010. IFIP AICT, vol. 319, pp. 224–238. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Deprez, J.-C., Simons, A.: Comparing Assessment Methodologies for Free/Open Source Software: OpenBRR and QSOS. LNCS, pp. 189–203. Springer, Berlin (2008)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Stallman, R.: GNU’s Bulletin 1(1), 8 (1986), Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Alshayeb, M., Li, W.: An Empirical Validation of Object-Oriented Metrics in Two Iterative Processes. IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 29(11), 1043–1049 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Paulson, J.W., Succi, G., Eberlein, A.: An Empirical Study of Open-Source and Closed-Source Software Products. IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 30(4), 246–256 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Scacchi, W.: Understanding free/open source software evolution. In: Madhavji, N.H., Lehman, M.M., Ramil, J.F., Perry, D. (eds.) Software Evolution. Wiley, New York (2004)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Crowston, K., Scozzi, B.: Open source software projects as virtual organizations: Competency rallying for software development. IEE Proceedings Software Engineering 149(1), 3–17 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Stewart, K.J., Ammeter, A.P., Maruping, L.M.: Impacts of License Choice and Organizational Sponsorship on User Interest and Development Activity in Open Source Software Projects. J. Information Systems Research 17(2), 126–144 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Capiluppi, A., Lago, P., Morisio, M.: Evidences in the evolution of OS projects through Changelog analyses. In: Proceedings 3rd Workshop on Open Source Software Engineering, 25th International Conference on Software Engineering, pp. 19–24 (2003)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Koch, S.: Software Evolution in Open Source Projects A Large-Scale Investigation. J. Software Maintenance and Evolution: Research and Practice 19(6), 361–382 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Robles-Martinez, G., Gonzalez-Barahona, J.M., Centeno-Gonzalez, J., Matellan-Olivera, V., Rodero-Merino, L.: Studying the evolution of libre software projects using publicly available data. In: Proceedings 3rd Workshop on Open Source Software Engineering, 25th International Conference on Software Engineering, pp. 111–116 (2003)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Crowston, K., Annabi, H., Howison, J., Masango, C.: Towards a portfolio of FLOSS project success measures. In: Collaboration, Conflict and Control: The 4th Workshop on Open Source Software Engineering, ICSE 2004 (2004)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Crowston, K., Annabi, H., Howison, J.: Defining Open Source Project Success. In: Proc. Intl. Conf. Information Systems (2003)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Grewal, R., Lilien, G.L., Mallapragada, G.: Location, Location, Location: How Network Embeddedness Affects Project Success in Open Source Systems. J. Management Science 52, 1043–1046 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Polancic, G., Horvat, R., Rozman, T.: Comparative Assessment of Open Source Software Using Easy Accessible Data. In: Proc. 26th Intl. Conf. Information Technology Interfaces, vol. 1, pp. 673–678 (2004)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Godfrey, M.W., Tu, Q.: Evolution in open source software: A case study. In: Proceedings International Conference on Software Maintenance, pp. 131–142 (2000)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Robles, G., Gonzalez-Barahona, J.M., Merelo, J.J.: Beyond source code: The importance of other artifacts in software development (a case study). Journal of Systems and Software 79(9), 1233–1248 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Mishra, A., Mishra, D.: Software quality assurance models in small and medium organisations: a comparison. IJITM 5(1), 4–20 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Raja, U., Tretter, M.J.: Defining and Evaluating a Measure of Open Source Project Survivability. IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 38(1), 163–174 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    McConnell, S.: Open-source methodology: Ready for prime time? IEEE Software 16(4), 6–8 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Yiftachel, P., Peled, D., Hadar, I., Goldwasser, D.: Resource allocation among development phases: an economic approach. In: Proceedings of the 2006 International Workshop on Economics Driven Software Engineering Research (EDSER 2006), pp. 43–48. ACM, New York (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    DeLone, W.H., McLean, E.R.: Information Systems Success: The Quest for the Dependent Variable. Information Systems Research 3(1), 60–95 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    von Hippel, E., von Krogh, G.: Open Source Software and the ‘Private-Collective‘ Innovation Model: Issues for Organization Science. Organization Science 14(2), 209 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Etiel Petrinja
    • 1
  • Giancarlo Succi
    • 1
  1. 1.Free University of BozenBolzanoItaly

Personalised recommendations