Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Curtis Atkisson

dblp:87/10883 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2024
0000-0003-3575-6871ORCID · reported

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Human-computer interaction and ubiquitous computing · 1 · 1 since 2021

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
1 paper
Empirical software engineering · 87% Software maintenance and evolution · 13%

Topics — the 3 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Empirical software engineering
mining software repositories
0.812024
Do We Run How We Say We Run? Formalization and Practice of Governance in OSS Communities · CHI 2024
Empirical software engineering › open source software
open source governance
0.812024
Do We Run How We Say We Run? Formalization and Practice of Governance in OSS Communities · CHI 2024
Software maintenance and evolution
software ecosystems
0.212024
Do We Run How We Say We Run? Formalization and Practice of Governance in OSS Communities · CHI 2024

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

semantic pipeline · 0.8mailing list analysis · 0.8
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2024 Do We Run How We Say We Run? Formalization and Practice of Governance in OSS Communities
abstract
Open Source Software (OSS) communities often resist regulation typical of traditional organizations. Yet formal governance systems are being increasingly adopted among communities, particularly through non-profit project-sponsoring foundations. Our study looks at the Apache Software Foundation Incubator program and 208 of the projects it has supported. We assemble a scalable, semantic pipeline to discover and analyze the governance behavior of projects from their mailing lists. We then investigate the relationship of such behavior to what the formal policies prescribe, through their own governance priorities and how their members internalize them. Our findings indicate that a greater amount of policy over a governed topic doesn’t elicit more governed activity on that topic, but does predict greater internalization by community members. Moreover, alignment of community operations with foundation governance, be it dedicating their governance focus or adopting policy along topics seeing greater policy-making, has limited association with project outcomes.
Mahasweta Chakraborti, Curtis Atkisson, Stefan Stanciulescu, Vladimir Filkov, Seth Frey
CHI2