[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/ skip to main content
article

Two case studies of open source software development: Apache and Mozilla

Published: 01 July 2002 Publication History

Abstract

According to its proponents, open source style software development has the capacity to compete successfully, and perhaps in many cases displace, traditional commercial development methods. In order to begin investigating such claims, we examine data from two major open source projects, the Apache web server and the Mozilla browser. By using email archives of source code change history and problem reports we quantify aspects of developer participation, core team size, code ownership, productivity, defect density, and problem resolution intervals for these OSS projects. We develop several hypotheses by comparing the Apache project with several commercial projects. We then test and refine several of these hypotheses, based on an analysis of Mozilla data. We conclude with thoughts about the prospects for high-performance commercial/open source process hybrids.

References

[1]
Ang, M. and Eich, B. 2000. A look at the Mozilla technology and architecture. In O'Reilly Open Source Convention. Available at http://mozilla.org/docs/ora-oss2000/arch-overview/intro.html.]]
[2]
Apache group. http://dev.apache.org/guidelines.html.]]
[3]
Baker, M. 2000. The Mozilla project and mozilla.org. Available at http://www.mozilla.org/editorials/mozilla-overview.html.]]
[4]
Basili V. R. and Weiss, D. M. 1984. A methodology for collecting valid software engineering data. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 10, 728--738.]]
[5]
Bollinger, T., Nelson, R., Self, K. M., and Turnbull, S. J. 1999. Open-source methods: Peering through the clutter, IEEE Softw. (July/August), 8--1.1]]
[6]
Carleton, A. D., Park, R. E., Goethert, W. B., Florac, W. A., Bailey, E. K., and Pfleeger, S. L. 1992. Software measurement for DoD systems: Recommendations for initial core measures. Tech. Rep. CMU/SEI-92-TR-19 Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh (September).]]
[7]
Curtis, B., Krasner, H., and Iscoe, N. 1988. A field study of the software design process for large systems. Commun. ACM 31, 1268--1287.]]
[8]
Dibona, C., Ockman, S., and Stone, M. 1999. Open Sources: Voices from the Open Source Revolution. O'Reilly, Sebastopol, Calif.]]
[9]
Eich, B. 2001. Mozilla development roadmap. Available at http://www.mozilla.org/roadmap.html.]]
[10]
Fenton, N. 1994. Software measurement: A necessary scientific basis. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 20, 199--206.]]
[11]
Fielding, R. T. 1999. Shared leadership in the apache project. Commun. ACM 42, 42--43.]]
[12]
Grinter, R. E., Herbsleb, J. D., and Perry, D. E. 1999. The geography of coordination: Dealing with distance in r&d work. In GROUP '99, Phoenix, Ariz.]]
[13]
Hecker, F. 1999. Mozilla at one: A look back and ahead. Available at http://www.mozilla. org/mozilla-at-one.html.]]
[14]
Herbsleb J. D., and Grinter, R. E. 1999. Splitting the organization and integrating the code: Conway's law revisited. In 21st International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE 99) (Los Angeles).]]
[15]
Howard, D. 2000. Source code directories overview. Available at http://mozilla.org/docs/source-directories-overview.html.]]
[16]
Krochmal, M. 1999. Linux interest expanding, in TechWeb. Available at http://www.techweb.com/wire/story/TWB19990521S0021.]]
[17]
Mcconnell, S. 1999. Open-source methodology: Ready for prime time? IEEE Softw. (July/August), 6--8.]]
[18]
Midha, K. 1997. Software configuration management for the 21st century, Bell Labs Tech. J. 2, 154--155.]]
[19]
Mockus, A. and Weiss, D. M. 2001. Globalization by chunking: A quantitative approach, IEEE Soft. 18, 2 (Jan.--March), 30--37.]]
[20]
Mozilla project. Bugzilla. Available at http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/]]
[21]
Mozilla project. Module Owners. Available at http://mozilla.org/owners.html]]
[22]
Mozilla project. Quality Assurance page. Available at http://www.mozilla.org/quality/]]
[23]
Mozilla project. Source Code via CVS. Available at http://www.mozilla.org/cvs.html]]
[24]
Netcraft, http://www.netcraft.com/survey.]]
[25]
Oeschger, I. and Boswell, D. 2000. Getting your work into Mozilla. Available at http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/mozilla/2000/09/29/keys.html]]
[26]
Paquin, T. and Tabb, L. 1998. Mozilla.org: Open-Source Software.]]
[27]
Perens, B. 1999. The open source definition. in Open Sources: Voices from the Open Source Revolution, C. Dibona, S. Ockman, and M. Stone, Eds., O'Reilly, Sebastopol, Calif., 171--188.]]
[28]
Raymond, E. S. 1999. The cathedral and the bazaar. Available at http://www.tuxedo.org/∼esr/writings/cathedral-bazaar/]]
[29]
Rochkind, M. J. 1975. The source code control system. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 1, 364--370.]]
[30]
Vixie, P. 1999. Software engineering. In Open Sources: Voices from the Open Source Revolution, C. Dibona, S. Ockman, and M. Stone, Eds., O'Reilly, Sebastopol, Calif., 91--100.]]
[31]
Williams, S. 2000. Learning the ways of Mozilla. Upside Today. Available at http://www.upside.com/texis/mvm/story?id=39e360180.]]
[32]
Yeh, C. 1999. Mozilla tree verification process. Available at http://www.mozilla.org/build/verification.html]]
[33]
Zawinski, J. 1999. Resignation and postmortem. Available at http://www.jwz.org/gruntle/nomo.html.]]

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)The Vitality of Open Source SoftwareInternational Journal of Advanced Research in Science, Communication and Technology10.48175/IJARSCT-17611(61-66)Online publication date: 24-Apr-2024
  • (2024)An Explainable Automated Model for Measuring Software Engineer ContributionProceedings of the 39th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering10.1145/3691620.3695071(783-794)Online publication date: 27-Oct-2024
  • (2024)Sustaining Maintenance Labor for Healthy Open Source Software Projects through Human Infrastructure: A Maintainer PerspectiveProceedings of the 18th ACM/IEEE International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement10.1145/3674805.3686667(37-48)Online publication date: 24-Oct-2024
  • Show More Cited By

Recommendations

Reviews

Satadip Dutta

The open source software development model differs from the traditional model in many ways. This paper provides a quantitative look at the open source development model being used for the Apache and Mozilla projects. The data collected from these projects is used to answer questions relating to the development process, to profile the contributors, and to examine defect tracking and resolution. The process used to collect process, contribution, and defect-related data from Apache and Mozilla is very extensive and convincing. The credibility and the relevance of the hypothesis derived from this data are subsequently very apt and prophetic. The conclusions of this article seem to be true for projects like Jboss (http://www.jboss.org) and Tomcat (http://jakarta.apache.org/tomcat/index.html). The recommendations made by the paper, in proposing a hybrid model for software development that combines aspects from the open source model and traditional model, provide a unique perspective for future software development projects. The paper provides excellent information, which can be of practical use in any software development project that wants to adopt some of the beneficial aspects of open source software development. Online Computing Reviews Service

Access critical reviews of Computing literature here

Become a reviewer for Computing Reviews.

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology
ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology  Volume 11, Issue 3
July 2002
93 pages
ISSN:1049-331X
EISSN:1557-7392
DOI:10.1145/567793
Issue’s Table of Contents

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 01 July 2002
Published in TOSEM Volume 11, Issue 3

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. Apache
  2. Mozilla
  3. Open source software
  4. code ownership
  5. defect density
  6. repair interval

Qualifiers

  • Article

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)357
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)50
Reflects downloads up to 12 Dec 2024

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)The Vitality of Open Source SoftwareInternational Journal of Advanced Research in Science, Communication and Technology10.48175/IJARSCT-17611(61-66)Online publication date: 24-Apr-2024
  • (2024)An Explainable Automated Model for Measuring Software Engineer ContributionProceedings of the 39th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering10.1145/3691620.3695071(783-794)Online publication date: 27-Oct-2024
  • (2024)Sustaining Maintenance Labor for Healthy Open Source Software Projects through Human Infrastructure: A Maintainer PerspectiveProceedings of the 18th ACM/IEEE International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement10.1145/3674805.3686667(37-48)Online publication date: 24-Oct-2024
  • (2024)How to Gain Commit Rights in Modern Top Open Source Communities?Proceedings of the ACM on Software Engineering10.1145/36607841:FSE(1727-1749)Online publication date: 12-Jul-2024
  • (2024)Revisiting Test-Case Prioritization on Long-Running Test SuitesProceedings of the 33rd ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis10.1145/3650212.3680307(615-627)Online publication date: 11-Sep-2024
  • (2024)Thirty-Three Years of Mathematicians and Software Engineers: A Case Study of Domain Expertise and Participation in Proof Assistant EcosystemsProceedings of the 21st International Conference on Mining Software Repositories10.1145/3643991.3644908(1-13)Online publication date: 15-Apr-2024
  • (2024)Beyond Accuracy: An Empirical Study on Unit Testing in Open-source Deep Learning ProjectsACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology10.1145/363824533:4(1-22)Online publication date: 18-Apr-2024
  • (2024)Do We Run How We Say We Run? Formalization and Practice of Governance in OSS CommunitiesProceedings of the 2024 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3613904.3641980(1-26)Online publication date: 11-May-2024
  • (2024)How Are Paid and Volunteer Open Source Developers Different? A Study of the Rust ProjectProceedings of the IEEE/ACM 46th International Conference on Software Engineering10.1145/3597503.3639197(1-13)Online publication date: 20-May-2024
  • (2024)Bringing Open Source Communication and Development Together: A Cross-Platform Study on Gitter and GitHubIEEE Transactions on Software Engineering10.1109/TSE.2024.341029250:11(2807-2826)Online publication date: Nov-2024
  • Show More Cited By

View Options

Login options

Full Access

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media