concept

Governance in Practice: How Open Source Projects Define...

Facts (18)

Sources

Governance in Practice: How Open Source Projects Define ... - arXiv arxiv.org arXiv 5 days ago 18 facts

procedureThe authors of 'Governance in Practice: How Open Source Projects Define...' adapted Institutional Grammar (IG) into a lightweight, role-centric interpretation for software projects, operationalizing it into four dimensions: scope, privileges, obligations, and promotion/demotion criteria.

claimThe research paper 'Governance in Practice: How Open Source Projects Define...' provides a dataset containing governance files, role extractions, coding templates, and analytical scripts used to generate the study's results, along with a README.md file for reproduction.

procedureThe authors of the study 'Governance in Practice: How Open Source Projects Define...' utilized manual interpretive clustering, refined through consensus discussions, to group governance roles after finding that unsupervised clustering produced unstable results for composite or overlapping roles.

referenceThe Zellij open source project (https://github.com/zellij-org/zellij) was accessed on 22 October 2025 and is referenced in section 4.2.4 of the paper 'Governance in Practice: How Open Source Projects Define ...'.

referenceThe 2023 IEEE/ACM 45th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE) proceedings (pp. 319–331) is referenced in sections 1 and 2 of the paper 'Governance in Practice: How Open Source Projects Define ...'.

claimIn the study 'Governance in Practice: How Open Source Projects Define...', researchers consolidated open source project roles into clusters including Contributor, Core Maintainer, Steering/Leadership, Reviewer, Triage, User, Project-Specific Roles, Advocacy, and Emeritus positions.

referenceThe paper 'Open source software sustainability: combining institutional analysis and socio-technical networks' (Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 6 (CSCW2), pp. 1–23) is referenced in section 2 of the paper 'Governance in Practice: How Open Source Projects Define ...'.

perspectiveThe study 'Governance in Practice: How Open Source Projects Define...' deliberately avoids linking governance forms to project outcomes like retention or success, focusing instead on descriptive and comparative interpretation.

referenceThe Vitess open source project (https://github.com/vitessio/vitess) was accessed on 22 October 2025 and is referenced in sections 4.2.1 and 4.2.2 of the paper 'Governance in Practice: How Open Source Projects Define ...'.

referenceAll role definitions and cluster mappings from the study 'Governance in Practice: How Open Source Projects Define...' are available in the replication package (Oliveira et al., 2025b) to ensure traceability between source data and outcomes.

claimThe authors of the study 'Governance in Practice: How Open Source Projects Define...' chose the Institutional Grammar structure over matrix-style responsibility models because it enables comparability across projects and aligns with rule-based representations of authority.

referenceThe authors of the study 'Governance in Practice: How Open Source Projects Define...' provide a replication package containing all materials used in their research, cited as Oliveira et al. (2025b).

claimThe study 'Governance in Practice: How Open Source Projects Define...' addresses the lack of empirical accounts regarding the responsibilities and decision structures codified in open source software (OSS) projects by analyzing governance documents across a diverse sample of projects.

measurementThe research project 'Governance in Practice: How Open Source Projects Define...' was supported by the National Science Foundation grant #2303612 and CNPq grants #314797/2023-8 and #443934/2023-1.

claimThe authors of the study 'Governance in Practice: How Open Source Projects Define...' adopted a governance role schema inspired by Institutional Grammar, as defined by Crawford and Ostrom (1995), Siddiki et al. (2011), and Sen et al. (2022).

procedureThe authors of 'Governance in Practice: How Open Source Projects Define ...' utilize a role-centric analytical lens grounded in Institutional Grammar to decompose governance rules into scopes, privileges, obligations, and transition criteria.

referenceThe paper 'Who will stay in the floss community? modeling participant’s initial behavior' (IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 41 (1), pp. 82–99) is referenced in section 2.1 of the paper 'Governance in Practice: How Open Source Projects Define ...'.

procedureThe authors of 'Governance in Practice: How Open Source Projects Define...' conducted a qualitative analysis of open source software (OSS) projects by systematically collecting governance files from GitHub, coding their contents to identify explicit role definitions, and comparing how authority, responsibility, and participation are described across projects.