Biblio

Change introduces conflict into software ecosystems: breaking changes may ripple through the ecosystem and trigger rework for users of a package, but often developers can invest additional effort or accept opportunity costs to alleviate or delay downstream costs. We performed a multiple case study of three software ecosystems with different tooling and philosophies toward change, Eclipse, R/CRAN, and Node.js/npm, to understand how developers make decisions about change and change-related costs and what practices, tooling, and policies are used. We found that all three ecosystems differ substantially in their practices and expectations toward change and that those differences can be explained largely by different community values in each ecosystem. Our results illustrate that there is a large design space in how to build an ecosystem, its policies and its supporting infrastructure; and there is value in making community values and accepted tradeoffs explicit and transparent in order to resolve conflicts and negotiate change-related costs

Today's social-coding tools foreshadow a transformation of the software industry, as it relies increasingly on open libraries, frameworks, and code fragments. Our vision calls for new intelligently transparent services that support rapid development of innovative products while helping developers manage risk and issuing them early warnings of looming failures. Intelligent transparency is enabled by an infrastructure that applies analytics to data from all phases of the life cycle of open source projects, from development to deployment. Such an infrastructure brings stakeholders the information they need when they need it.