Mining Communication Patterns in Software Development: A GitHub Analysis

1. Does the paper propose a new opinion mining approach?

No

2. Which opinion mining techniques are used (list all of them, clearly stating their name/reference)?

Politeness measuring by Danescu etal: Cristian Danescu-Niculescu-Mizil, Moritz Sudhof, Dan Jurafsky, Jure Leskovec, and Christopher Potts. 2013. A computational approach to politeness with application to social factors. In Proceedings of ACL Emotion mining extended by Murgia etal: Alessandro Murgia, Marco Ortu, Parastou Tourani, Bram Adams, and Serge Demeyer. 2017. An exploratory qualitative and quantitative analysis of emotions in issue report comments of open source systems. Empirical Software Engineering (2017), 1–44.

3. Which opinion mining approaches in the paper are publicly available? Write down their name and links. If no approach is publicly available, leave it blank or None.

Papers do not link to tools used, only give references.

4. What is the main goal of the whole study?

Compare casual contributors (one-time contributors) to more frequent contributors to determine whether these exhibit different patterns when it comes to how these users communicate in github comments.

5. What the researchers want to achieve by applying the technique(s) (e.g., calculate the sentiment polarity of app reviews)?

Calculate the sentiment of developers in issue comments.

6. Which dataset(s) the technique is applied on?

A dataset of commits and issues extracted from GHTorrent of 5 OS projects.

7. Is/Are the dataset(s) publicly available online? If yes, please indicate their name and links.

GHTorrent is available, their subset is not.

8. Is the application context (dataset or application domain) different from that for which the technique was originally designed?

Yes, different dataset, however the domain is the same, both are issue comments.

9. Is the performance (precision, recall, run-time, etc.) of the technique verified? If yes, how did they verify it and what are the results?

No.

10. Does the paper replicate the results of previous work? If yes, leave a summary of the findings (confirm/partially confirms/contradicts).

no.

11. What success metrics are used?

None.

12. Write down any other comments/notes here.

-