Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
10.1145/3377816.3381729acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesicseConference Proceedingsconference-collections
short-paper

Understanding FLOSS through community publications: strategies for grey literature review

Published: 18 September 2020 Publication History

Abstract

Over the last decades, the Free/Libre/Open Source Software (FLOSS) phenomenon has been a topic of study and a source of real-life artifacts for software engineering research. A FLOSS project usually has a community around its project, organically producing informative resources to describe how, when, and why a particular change occurred in the source code or the development flow. Therefore, when studying this kind of project, collecting and analyzing texts and artifacts can promote a more comprehensive understanding of the phenomenon and the variety of organizational settings. However, despite the importance of examining Grey Literature (GL), such as technical reports, white papers, magazines, and blog posts for studying FLOSS projects, the GL Review is still an emerging technique in software engineering studies, lacking a well-established investigative methodology. To mitigate this gap, we present and discuss challenges and adaptations for the planning and execution of GL reviews in the FLOSS scenario. We provide a set of guidelines and lessons learned for further research, using, as an example, a review we are conducting on the Linux kernel development model.

References

[1]
R. J. Adams, P. Smart, and A. S. Huff. 2017. Shades of Grey: Guidelines for Working with the Grey Literature in Systematic Reviews for Management and Organizational Studies. International Journal of Management Reviews 19, 4 (2017).
[2]
J. Bailey, D. Budgen, M. Turner, B. Kitchenham, P. Brereton, and S. Linkman. 2007. Evidence relating to Object-Oriented software design: A survey. In First International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement.
[3]
J. C. de A. Biolchini, P. G. Mian, A. C. C. Natali, T. U. Conte, and G. H. Travassos. 2007. Scientific research ontology to support systematic review in software engineering. Advanced Engineering Informatics 21, 2 (2007), 133--151.
[4]
B. B. N. de França, H. Jeronimo Junior, and G. H. Travassos. 2016. Characterizing DevOps by Hearing Multiple Voices. In Proceedings of the 30th Brazilian Symposium on Software Engineering (SBES '16). ACM, 53--62.
[5]
V. Garousi, M. Felderer, and M. V. Mäntylä. 2016. The Need for Multivocal Literature Reviews in Software Engineering: Complementing Systematic Literature Reviews with Grey Literature. In Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering.
[6]
V. Garousi, M. Felderer, and M. V. Mäntylä. 2018. Guidelines for including grey literature and conducting multivocal literature reviews in software engineering. Information and Software Technology (2018).
[7]
K. Godin, J. Stapleton, S. I. Kirkpatrick, R. M. Hanning, and S. T. Leatherdale. 2015. Applying systematic review search methods to the grey literature: a case study examining guidelines for school-based breakfast programs in Canada. Systematic Reviews (2015).
[8]
Julian P. T. Higgins and James Thomas (Eds.). 2019. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions (2nd ed.). Wiley-Blackwell.
[9]
B. Kitchenham, O. P. Brereton, D. Budgen, M. Turner, J. Bailey, and S. Linkman. 2009. Systematic Literature Reviews in Software Engineering - A Systematic Literature Review. Inf. Softw. Technol. 51, 1 (2009), 7--15.
[10]
Arsenio Paez. 2017. Gray literature: An important resource in systematic reviews. Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine 10, 3 (2017), 233--240.
[11]
Eric Raymond. 1999. The cathedral and the bazaar. Knowledge, Technology and Policy 12, 3 (1999), 23--49.
[12]
Hannah. Rothstein, A. J. Sutton, and Michael. Borenstein. 2005. Publication bias in meta-analysis: prevention, assessment and adjustments. Wiley.
[13]
Jacopo Soldani, Damian Andrew Tamburri, and Willem-Jan Van Den Heuvel. 2018. The pains and gains of microservices: A Systematic grey literature review. Journal of Systems and Software 146 (2018), 215--232.

Cited By

View all

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences
ICSE-NIER '20: Proceedings of the ACM/IEEE 42nd International Conference on Software Engineering: New Ideas and Emerging Results
June 2020
128 pages
ISBN:9781450371261
DOI:10.1145/3377816
Publication rights licensed to ACM. ACM acknowledges that this contribution was authored or co-authored by an employee, contractor or affiliate of a national government. As such, the Government retains a nonexclusive, royalty-free right to publish or reproduce this article, or to allow others to do so, for Government purposes only.

Sponsors

In-Cooperation

  • KIISE: Korean Institute of Information Scientists and Engineers
  • IEEE CS

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 18 September 2020

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. FLOSS
  2. grey literature
  3. linux
  4. literature review
  5. methodology

Qualifiers

  • Short-paper

Conference

ICSE '20
Sponsor:

Upcoming Conference

ICSE 2025

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • 0
    Total Citations
  • 101
    Total Downloads
  • Downloads (Last 12 months)15
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 25 Dec 2024

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all

View Options

Login options

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