adaptation-slr/070725_papers_master.csv

1	Key	Item Type	Publication Year	Author	Title	DOI	Change characteristics (blue)	Actors (purple)	Environmental characteristics (green)	Methods details (orange)	Misc. (red)
2	LB5MEY9S	journalArticle	2017	Norskov, Sladjana; Kesting, Peter; Ulhoi, John Parm	Deliberate change without hierarchical influence? The case of collaborative OSS communities	10.1108/IJOA-08-2016-1050
3	KUWLMFWM	journalArticle	2017	Santos, Carlos Denner D60os	Changes in free and open source software licenses: managerial interventions and variations on project attractiveness	10.1186/s13174-017-0062-3
4	SJEI288C	conferencePaper	2024	Franke, Lucas; Liang, Huayu; Farzanehpour, Sahar; Brantly, Aaron; Davis, James C.; Brown, Chris	An Exploratory Mixed-methods Study on General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Compliance in Open-Source Software	10.1145/3674805.3686692	technical and organizational: broad compliance with GDPR; increased development work and attention devoted to compliance with GDPR features and PRs -- increases to the technical management of data --- organizational: slowed down development timelines immensely --- organization: GDPR compliance requires and overhaul of --- consultation with legal team is a change in and of itself ; one that decreased productivity; technical because the technical aspects of the code were the things regulated by GDPR	OSS project developers --- some of whom had submitted GDPR compliance Prs	geopolitical legal regulation --- data privacy and rights regulation --- EU --- from a technical level, this is a non-functional requirement ---internal evaluation of change success within environment: consultation with legal counsel --- self-assessment --- “most of the resources on the internet are wrong”	Mixed-methods: pilot interview study with three developers; survey with 56 developers; mined Prs from GitHub, some sampling for survey done from activity data mined from GitHub ; grounded thematic coding methods for analysis of free responses/qualitative themes	developers not happy about compliance --- frustration of internal productivity in order to comply with the standard--- unhappiness also with the standard itself, not just what the compliance does to the project
5	U7U4YLVB	journalArticle	2023	Hsieh, Jane; Kim, Joselyn; Dabbish, Laura; Zhu, Haiyi	"Nip it in the Bud": Moderation Strategies in Open Source Software Projects and the Role of Bots	10.1145/3610092
6	M6PP5MPQ	conferencePaper	2011	Jensen, Chris; Scacchi, Walt	License Update and Migration Processes in Open Source Software Projects	https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-24418-6_12
7	ENQ5AACF	journalArticle	2022	Barcomb, Ann; Klaas-Jan Stol; Fitzgerald, Brian; Riehle, Dirk	Managing Episodic Volunteers in Free/Libre/Open Source Software Communities	10.1109/TSE.2020.2985093
8	RN5Y3TN5	conferencePaper	2020	Wessel, Mairieli; Serebrenik, Alexander; Wiese, Igor; Steinmacher, Igor; Gerosa, Marco A.	What to Expect from Code Review Bots on GitHub? A Survey with OSS Maintainers	10.1145/3422392.3422459
9	HS8AQN5V	journalArticle	2010	Sojer, Manuel; Henkel, Joachim	Code Reuse in Open Source Software Development: Quantitative Evidence, Drivers, and Impediments	10.17705/1jais.00248
10	GGZV58MQ	journalArticle	2021	Klug, Daniel; Bogart, Christopher; Herbsleb, James D.	"They Can Only Ever Guide": How an Open Source Software Community Uses Roadmaps to Coordinate Effort	10.1145/3449232
11	JL6YZE5S	journalArticle	2023	Hu, Jin; Hu, Daning; Yang, Xuan; Chau, Michael	The impacts of lockdown on open source software contributions during the COVID-19 pandemic	10.1016/j.respol.2023.104885
12	XPC3Y8HH	journalArticle	2020	Butler, Simon; Gamalielsson, Jonas; Lundell, Bjorn; Brax, Christoffer; Mattsson, Anders; Gustaysson, Tomas; Feist, Jonas; Lonroth, Erik	Maintaining interoperability in open source software: A case study of the Apache PDFBox project	10.1016/j.jss.2019.110452
13	4V42NWTT	journalArticle	2016	Adams, Bram; Kavanagh, Ryan; Hassan, Ahmed E.; German, Daniel M.	An empirical study of integration activities in distributions of open source software	10.1007/s10664-015-9371-y
14	MVGUFG8P	conferencePaper	2016	Crowston, Kevin; Shamshurin, Ivan	Core-Periphery Communication and the Success of Free/Libre Open Source Software Projects	10.1007/978-3-319-39225-7_4
15	WE8VYWEX	journalArticle	2021	Geiger, R. Stuart; Howard, Dorothy; Irani, Lilly	The Labor of Maintaining and Scaling Free and Open-Source Software Projects	10.1145/3449249
16	3F7CJATB	journalArticle	2022	Yin, Likang; Chakraborti, Mahasweta; Yan, Yibo; Schweik, Charles; Frey, Seth; Filkov, Vladimir	Open Source Software Sustainability: Combining Institutional Analysis and Socio-Technical Networks	10.1145/3555129
17	BFEMKQCR	journalArticle	2014	Gamalielsson, Jonas; Lundell, Björn	Sustainability of Open Source software communities beyond a fork: How and why has the LibreOffice project evolved?	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2013.11.1077
18	FJSA37EW	journalArticle	2021	Bogart, Chris; Kästner, Christian; Herbsleb, James; Thung, Ferdian	When and How to Make Breaking Changes: Policies and Practices in 18 Open Source Software Ecosystems	10.1145/3447245
19	72F8GVAP	journalArticle	2025	Jahanshahi, Mahmoud; Reid, David; Mockus, Audris	Beyond Dependencies: The Role of Copy-Based Reuse in Open Source Software Development	10.1145/3715907
20	QEKG8ISF	journalArticle	2016	Hilton, Michael; Tunnell, Timothy; Huang, Kai; Marinov, Darko; Dig, Danny	ASE - Usage, costs, and benefits of continuous integration in open-source projects	10.1145/2970276.2970358
21	ZGK4HR76	journalArticle	2015	Vendome, Christopher; Linares-Vasquez, Mario; Bavota, Gabriele; Di Penta, Massimiliano; German, Daniel M.; Poshyvanyk, Denys	ICSME - When and why developers adopt and change software licenses	10.1109/icsm.2015.7332449
22	PSZSSAS3	journalArticle	2017	Ding, Hui; Ma, Wanwangying; Chen, Lin; Zhou, Yuming; Xu, Baowen	APSEC - An Empirical Study on Downstream Workarounds for Cross-Project Bugs	10.1109/apsec.2017.38
23	V3F8FYG5	journalArticle	2018	Meloca, Rômulo; Pinto, Gustavo; Baiser, Leonardo; Mattos, Marco; Polato, Ivanilton; Wiese, Igor; German, Daniel M.	Understanding the usage, impact, and adoption of non-OSI approved licenses	10.1145/3196398.3196427	Organizational -- adoption of non OSI approved licenses or change to OSI-approved license --- the majority of the changes in either direction were from the adoption or deletion of a license (which happened to be OSI compliant) --- RQ3 provides naivete or lack of care for reasoning for moves into non-approved licenses	OSS package publishers --- some of whom have published packages with non-OSI approved licenses	governing body --- OSI is an open source regulator, vets the software license to make sure that it’s either open source or not --Also looking at compliance within three well-known open source libraries: NPM, RubyGems and CRAN; these enviroments are kinda nested within the focal environment, compliance in terms of sync with dependencies --- check of ‘success’ or anything: majority of the time, surveyed developers are not checking whether the different licenses they select are conforming, or adhering to anything	Mixed-methods: mining packages from the three different package manager environments -- pulled down a bunch of package data from the different ecosystems and looked through their license change over specified versions: a survey with the publishers of the package. sampled from NPM. open responses were qualitatively coded by pairs of researchers	not happy with the way that the different segments of the project are conflated with each other --- what use is the response of developers who use specific non-compliant licenses when the majority of non-compliance evolution is deletion or lack of license? --- different sets of populations between different methods sections of the research --- “developers might not fully understand the effect of the adaptive action that they’re taking” --- contributors ‘dont care; about the licenses they use
24	6AQY86BW	journalArticle	2022	Businge, John; Openja, Moses; Nadi, Sarah; Berger, Thorsten	Reuse and maintenance practices among divergent forks in three software ecosystems	10.1007/s10664-021-10078-2
25	YJREPLGY	journalArticle	2023	Venturini, Daniel; Cogo, Filipe Roseiro; Polato, Ivanilton; Gerosa, Marco A.; Wiese, Igor Scaliante	I Depended on You and You Broke Me: An Empirical Study of Manifesting Breaking Changes in Client Packages	10.1145/3576037
26	QIVH9LJG	journalArticle	2017	Abdalkareem, Rabe; Nourry, Olivier; Wehaibi, ; Mujahid, Suhaib; Shihab, Emad	Why do developers use trivial packages? an empirical case study on npm	10.1145/3106237.3106267	technical: code reuse: trivial package reuse: rationale – trivial packages provide well-implemented and tested code from the packaging ecosystem: enables adherence to the quality testing of the broader ecosystem	application developers; professional JS developers; many long-tenured	package management systems: npm – node.js; change adheres project to well-tested and implemented environment; there are a lot of trivial packages; no project evaluation of change ‘success’ wrt environment	mixed methods: pilot survey – data mining – follow up survey – data mining to validate survey responses: sampling from prior methods step: skews to university; survey free-response answers were analyzed with qualitative coding – grounded theory methods	internal motivations for productiivty: many also stated that reuse was bad: developers aware that the change may represent existential risk for themselves; in adapting may also introduce more threats
27	TFDYF5UM	journalArticle	2011	Capiluppi, Andrea; Stol, Klaas-Jan; Boldyreff, Cornelia	Software Reuse in Open Source: A Case Study	10.4018/jossp.2011070102
28	XDY5INZ6	conferencePaper	2018	Lotter, Adriaan; Licorish, Sherlock A.; Savarimuthu, Bastin Tony Roy; Meldrum, Sarah	Code Reuse in Stack Overflow and Popular Open Source Java Projects	10.1109/ASWEC.2018.00027
29	MBVCDT66	journalArticle	2023	He, Runzhi; He, Hao; Zhang, Yuxia; Zhou, Minghui	Automating Dependency Updates in Practice: An Exploratory Study on GitHub Dependabot	10.1109/TSE.2023.3278129
30	DGV2UJNM	conferencePaper	2020	Zhou, Shurui; Vasilescu, Bogdan; Kästner, Christian	How has forking changed in the last 20 years? a study of hard forks on GitHub	10.1145/3377811.3380412
31	QLSEMWTQ	journalArticle	2017	Vendome, Christopher; Bavota, Gabriele; Penta, Massimiliano Di; Linares-Vásquez, Mario; German, Daniel; Poshyvanyk, Denys	License usage and changes: a large-scale study on gitHub	10.1007/s10664-016-9438-4
32	5E2EWRQN	journalArticle	2020	Abdalkareem, Rabe; Oda, Vinicius; Mujahid, Suhaib; Shihab, Emad	On the impact of using trivial packages: an empirical case study on npm and PyPI	10.1007/s10664-019-09792-9	technical: code reuse: trivial package reuse: rationale – trivial packages provide well-implemented and tested code from the packaging ecosystem: enables adherence to the quality testing of the broader ecosystem	application developers: long-tenured JS and Python coders: largely professional but some independents	package managemeny systems: npm and PyPI: change adheres project to well-tested and implemented environment: no project evaluation of change ‘success’ wrt environment	mixed methods: pilot survey – data mining – follow up survey – data mining to validate survey responses: sampling from prior methods step: skews to university	internal motivations for productiivty: many also stated that reuse was bad: paper spends a lot of time defining trivial packages
33	P3MTJWXP	conferencePaper	2022	Zhang, Xunhui; Wang, Tao; Yu, Yue; Zeng, Qiubing; Li, Zhixing; Wang, Huaimin	Who, What, Why and How? Towards the Monetary Incentive in Crowd Collaboration: A Case Study of Github’s Sponsor Mechanism	10.1145/3491102.3501822
34	DW9Q2W6V	conferencePaper	2022	Businge, John; Zerouali, Ahmed; Decan, Alexandre; Mens, Tom; Demeyer, Serge; De Roover, Coen	Variant Forks - Motivations and Impediments	10.1109/SANER53432.2022.00105
35	3Y9YKK5M	conferencePaper	2011	Heinemann, Lars; Deissenboeck, Florian; Gleirscher, Mario; Hummel, Benjamin; Irlbeck, Maximilian	On the Extent and Nature of Software Reuse in Open Source Java Projects