Understanding the role of external pull requests in the NPM ecosystem
The risk to using third-party libraries in a software application is that much needed maintenance is solely carried out by library maintainers. These libraries may rely on a core team of maintainers (who might be a single maintainer that is unpaid and overworked) to serve a massive client user-base....
Saved in:
Main Authors: | , , , , |
---|---|
Format: | text |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University
2023
|
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/sis_research/8797 https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/context/sis_research/article/9800/viewcontent/s10664_023_10315_w.pdf |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Institution: | Singapore Management University |
Language: | English |
id |
sg-smu-ink.sis_research-9800 |
---|---|
record_format |
dspace |
spelling |
sg-smu-ink.sis_research-98002024-05-30T08:47:19Z Understanding the role of external pull requests in the NPM ecosystem MAEPRASART, Vittunyuta WATTANAKRIENGKRAI, Supatsara KULA, Raula Gaikovina TREUDE, Christoph MATSUMOTO, Kenichi The risk to using third-party libraries in a software application is that much needed maintenance is solely carried out by library maintainers. These libraries may rely on a core team of maintainers (who might be a single maintainer that is unpaid and overworked) to serve a massive client user-base. On the other hand, being open source has the benefit of receiving contributions (in the form of External PRs) to help fix bugs and add new features. In this paper, we investigate the role by which External PRs (contributions from outside the core team of maintainers) contribute to a library. Through a preliminary analysis, we find that External PRs are prevalent, and just as likely to be accepted as maintainer PRs. We find that 26.75% of External PRs submitted fix existing issues. Moreover, fixes also belong to labels such as breaking changes, urgent, and on-hold. Differently from Internal PRs, External PRs cover documentation changes (44 out of 384 PRs), while not having as much refactoring (34 out of 384 PRs). On the other hand, External PRs also cover new features (380 out of 384 PRs) and bugs (120 out of 384 PRs). Our results lay the groundwork for understanding how maintainers decide which external contributions they select to evolve their libraries and what role they play in reducing the workload. 2023-07-01T07:00:00Z text application/pdf https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/sis_research/8797 info:doi/10.1007/s10664-023-10315-w https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/context/sis_research/article/9800/viewcontent/s10664_023_10315_w.pdf http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ Research Collection School Of Computing and Information Systems eng Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University Third-party libraries Pull Requests OSS sustainability Software Ecosystem Software Engineering |
institution |
Singapore Management University |
building |
SMU Libraries |
continent |
Asia |
country |
Singapore Singapore |
content_provider |
SMU Libraries |
collection |
InK@SMU |
language |
English |
topic |
Third-party libraries Pull Requests OSS sustainability Software Ecosystem Software Engineering |
spellingShingle |
Third-party libraries Pull Requests OSS sustainability Software Ecosystem Software Engineering MAEPRASART, Vittunyuta WATTANAKRIENGKRAI, Supatsara KULA, Raula Gaikovina TREUDE, Christoph MATSUMOTO, Kenichi Understanding the role of external pull requests in the NPM ecosystem |
description |
The risk to using third-party libraries in a software application is that much needed maintenance is solely carried out by library maintainers. These libraries may rely on a core team of maintainers (who might be a single maintainer that is unpaid and overworked) to serve a massive client user-base. On the other hand, being open source has the benefit of receiving contributions (in the form of External PRs) to help fix bugs and add new features. In this paper, we investigate the role by which External PRs (contributions from outside the core team of maintainers) contribute to a library. Through a preliminary analysis, we find that External PRs are prevalent, and just as likely to be accepted as maintainer PRs. We find that 26.75% of External PRs submitted fix existing issues. Moreover, fixes also belong to labels such as breaking changes, urgent, and on-hold. Differently from Internal PRs, External PRs cover documentation changes (44 out of 384 PRs), while not having as much refactoring (34 out of 384 PRs). On the other hand, External PRs also cover new features (380 out of 384 PRs) and bugs (120 out of 384 PRs). Our results lay the groundwork for understanding how maintainers decide which external contributions they select to evolve their libraries and what role they play in reducing the workload. |
format |
text |
author |
MAEPRASART, Vittunyuta WATTANAKRIENGKRAI, Supatsara KULA, Raula Gaikovina TREUDE, Christoph MATSUMOTO, Kenichi |
author_facet |
MAEPRASART, Vittunyuta WATTANAKRIENGKRAI, Supatsara KULA, Raula Gaikovina TREUDE, Christoph MATSUMOTO, Kenichi |
author_sort |
MAEPRASART, Vittunyuta |
title |
Understanding the role of external pull requests in the NPM ecosystem |
title_short |
Understanding the role of external pull requests in the NPM ecosystem |
title_full |
Understanding the role of external pull requests in the NPM ecosystem |
title_fullStr |
Understanding the role of external pull requests in the NPM ecosystem |
title_full_unstemmed |
Understanding the role of external pull requests in the NPM ecosystem |
title_sort |
understanding the role of external pull requests in the npm ecosystem |
publisher |
Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University |
publishDate |
2023 |
url |
https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/sis_research/8797 https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/context/sis_research/article/9800/viewcontent/s10664_023_10315_w.pdf |
_version_ |
1814047532786909184 |