A sense of community: A research agenda for software ecosystems

Jansen, Slinger; Finkelstein, Anthony; Brinkkemper, Sjaak

doi:10.1109/icse-companion.2009.5070978

Cited by 312 publications

(195 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

167

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Our work contributes carefully developed hypotheses about technical mechanisms. Jansen et al [12] present a research agenda for software ecosystems, proposing to study ecosystems such as MySQL/ PHP, Microsoft Windows, and iPhone apps. We deliver on this agenda by investigating similar systems.…”

Section: Software Ecosystem Theory Buildingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While variability mechanisms in software product lines are reasonably well researched [10,11], their role in supporting a software ecosystem is much less understood [9]. In fact, developing models that describe ecosystems [12] and defining theories that explain concepts and causalities [13], are key research challenges in this field.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Yet, ecosystems are often considered as technical constructs [15,16], arguably with fluid boundaries to related paradigms, such as distributed systems or componentware [17]. We take the view of ecosystems being extensions of product lines of substantial size [4,12,18,19]. We consider the following two characteristics of an ecosystem, as defined by Hanssen [20], as central to our study: (i) a network of organizations, and (ii) a common interest in central software technology.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Variability mechanisms in software ecosystems

Berger

Pfeiffer

Tartler

et al. 2014

Information and Software Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Context: Software ecosystems are increasingly popular for their economic, strategic, and technical advantages. Application platforms such as Android or iOS allow users to highly customize a system by selecting desired functionality from a large variety of assets. This customization is achieved using variability mechanisms. Objective: Variability mechanisms are well-researched in the context of software product lines. Although software ecosystems are often seen as conceptual successors, the technology that sustains their success and growth is much less understood. Our objective is to improve the empirical understanding of variability mechanisms used in successful software ecosystems. Method: We analyze five ecosystems, ranging from the Linux kernel through Eclipse to Android. A qualitative analysis identifies and characterizes variability mechanisms together with their organizational context. This analysis leads to a conceptual framework that unifies ecosystem-specific aspects using a common terminology. A quantitative analysis investigates scales, growth rates, and-most importantly-dependency structures of the ecosystems. Results: In all the studied ecosystems, we identify rich dependency languages and variability descriptions that declare many direct and indirect dependencies. Indirect dependencies to abstract capabilities, as opposed to concrete variability units, are used predominantly in fast-growing ecosystems. We also find that variability models-while providing systemwide abstractions over code-work best in centralized variability management and are, thus, absent in ecosystems with large free markets. These latter ecosystems tend to emphasize maintaining capabilities and common vocabularies, dynamic discovery, and binding with strong encapsulation of contributions, together with uniform distribution channels. Conclusion:The use of specialized mechanisms in software ecosystems with large free markets, as opposed to software product lines, calls for recognition of a new discipline-variability encouragement.

show abstract

Section: Software Ecosystem Theory Buildingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Variability mechanisms in software ecosystems

Berger

Pfeiffer

Tartler

et al. 2014

Information and Software Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In previous work [38] we identified the existence of three major streams in software ecosystems in research: (1) software platforms and architecture, which includes modelling and architecture such as software evolution, software architecture, and software development as product lines [8] (2) business and managerial perspectives [34,35], and (3) FOSS ecosystems [45,68]. In addition, an ecosystem can be studied in-the-large or in-the-small [49].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Herding cats in a FOSS ecosystem: a tale of communication and coordination for release management

Poo-Caamaño

Knauss

Singer

et al. 2017

J Internet Serv Appl

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Release management in large-scale software development projects requires significant communication and coordination. It is particularly challenging in Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) ecosystems, in which hundreds of loosely connected developers and their projects are coordinated to release software to a schedule. To better understand this process and its challenges, we analyzed over two and half years of communication in the GNOME ecosystem and studied developers' interactions. Through a case study, we cataloged communication channels, determined the main channel from which we categorized high level communication and coordination activities spanning five releases, and triangulated our results by interviewing ten key developers. We found that a release schedule, influence (instead of direct control), and diversity are the main factors that positively impact the release process in the GNOME ecosystem. We report a set of lessons learned that encapsulates our understanding of how the Release Management process function in a FOSS ecosystem, we learned that: (1) ensure that the release team follows the main communication channels used by developers, (2) provide a common place for coordination for an ecosystem, (3) consider including both good technical and social skills in a release team, (4) aim for a diverse release team, (5) based on lack of power, lobbying and consensus based management must be followed, (6) help the release team in the coordination process with a well defined schedule, and (7) release team work is different from regular software work. Our results can help organizations build better large-scale teams and show that research focused on individual projects might miss important parts of the picture.

show abstract

“…Software vendors usually lack the perspective to develop software within a software ecosystem. The inability to function in a software ecosystem has already led to the demise of many software vendors, leading to the loss of competition, intellectual property and, eventually, jobs in the software industry (Janssen, Finkelstein, & Brinkkemper, 2009). Mobile application stores have revolutionized software and content delivery in that these stores focus on applications, building around them an ecosystem of developers and consumers (Cuadrado & Dueñas, 2012).…”

Section: Entrepreneurial Ecosystems and Platformsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evolution and variety in complex geographies and enterprise policies

Yun

Cooke

Park

2017

European Planning Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This Special Issue showcases eight articles on the emergent idea of "entrepreneurial ecosystems". As a subject it has begun to attract early attention because it professes to realise the fundamentally social processes of entrepreneurial practice as against the cartoonlike figure of the heroic entrepreneur much-beloved of those in entrepreneurial studies and policies of a more individualistic persuasion. Furthermore, it aims to assist development of coherence in the field of study occasioned by the great variety of forms and labels given to small and micro-businesses consequent on the erosion in scale and scope of many traditional large enterprises. A further introductory point to be made is that many of the articles on display originate in South Korea where the attenuation of large corporate actors, stagnating national growth rates and government support for entrepreneurship have been one response to the crisis. Hanjin is merely one of the recent casualties of the faltering of globalisation for the South Korean corporate sector, beneficiary of major port-related innovation investment in the past as the South Korea -China comparison paper reveals. Other papers anatomise "platform ecosystems" in ICT applications, green urban policies, clusters, creative industry and regional development. All of these impinge upon government support for entrepreneurial efforts to grow a more social economy and, indeed, economic sociology and geography of regional and national growth.

show abstract

A sense of community: A research agenda for software ecosystems

Cited by 312 publications

References 6 publications

Variability mechanisms in software ecosystems

Variability mechanisms in software ecosystems

Herding cats in a FOSS ecosystem: a tale of communication and coordination for release management

Evolution and variety in complex geographies and enterprise policies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About