Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
139 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
7 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
46 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
38 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

"My GitHub Sponsors profile is live!" Investigating the Impact of Twitter/X Mentions on GitHub Sponsors (2401.02755v1)

Published 5 Jan 2024 in cs.SE

Abstract: GitHub Sponsors was launched in 2019, enabling donations to open-source software developers to provide financial support, as per GitHub's slogan: "Invest in the projects you depend on". However, a 2022 study on GitHub Sponsors found that only two-fifths of developers who were seeking sponsorship received a donation. The study found that, other than internal actions (such as offering perks to sponsors), developers had advertised their GitHub Sponsors profiles on social media, such as Twitter (also known as X). Therefore, in this work, we investigate the impact of tweets that contain links to GitHub Sponsors profiles on sponsorship, as well as their reception on Twitter/X. We further characterize these tweets to understand their context and find that (1) such tweets have the impact of increasing the number of sponsors acquired, (2) compared to other donation platforms such as Open Collective and Patreon, GitHub Sponsors has significantly fewer interactions but is more visible on Twitter/X, and (3) developers tend to contribute more to open-source software during the week of posting such tweets. Our findings are the first step toward investigating the impact of social media on obtaining funding to sustain open-source software.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (49)
  1. Arzoo Atiq and Arvind Tripathi. 2016. Impact of financial benefits on open source software sustainability. In Proceedings of 37th International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS ’16). 10.
  2. Peter C. Austin. 2009. Balance diagnostics for comparing the distribution of baseline covariates between treatment groups in propensity-score matched samples. Statistics in Medicine 28, 25 (2009), 3083–3107. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.3697 arXiv:https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/sim.3697
  3. A Large Scale Study of Long-Time Contributor Prediction for GitHub Projects. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 47, 6 (2021), 1277–1298. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSE.2019.2918536
  4. Social media for software engineering. In Proceedings of the FSE/SDP workshop on Future of software engineering research. 33–38.
  5. A survey of social media use in software systems development. In Proceedings of the 1st Workshop on Web 2.0 for Software Engineering. 1–5.
  6. Sue Black and Joanne Jacobs. 2010. Using Web 2.0 to improve software quality. In Proceedings of the 1st Workshop on Web 2.0 for Software Engineering. 6–11.
  7. Understanding the popular users: Following, affiliation influence and leadership on GitHub. Information and Software Technology 70 (2016), 30–39.
  8. Hudson Silva Borges and Marco Tulio Valente. 2019. How do developers promote open source projects? Computer 52, 8 (2019), 27–33.
  9. Towards understanding twitter use in software engineering: preliminary findings, ongoing challenges and future questions. In Proceedings of the 2nd international workshop on Web 2.0 for software engineering. 31–36.
  10. Andrea Capiluppi and Daniel Izquierdo-Cortázar. 2013. Effort estimation of FLOSS projects: a study of the Linux kernel. Empirical Software Engineering 18 (2013), 60–88.
  11. Open Collective. 2023. Raise and spend money with full transparency. — opencollective.com. https://opencollective.com/. [Accessed 28-Jun-2023].
  12. CVE. 2021. CVE - CVE-2021-44228 — cve.mitre.org. https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2021-44228. [Accessed 28-Jun-2023].
  13. Nadia Eghbal. 2019. A handy guide to financial support for open source. https://github.com/nayafia/lemonade-stand. Accessed: https://opensourcesurvey.org/2017/.
  14. Need for tweet: How open source developers talk about their github work on twitter. In Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Mining Software Repositories. 322–326.
  15. “This is Damn Slick!”: Estimating the Impact of Tweets on Open Source Project Popularity and New Contributors. In Proceedings of the 44th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE ’22). 2116–2129. https://doi.org/10.1145/3510003.3510121
  16. Gitcoin. 2023. Grants — gitcoin.co. https://gitcoin.co/grants/. [Accessed 28-Jun-2023].
  17. GitHub. 2017. Open Source Survey 2017. https://opensourcesurvey.org/2017/. Accessed: 2022-08-18.
  18. GitHub. 2023a. Build software better, together — github.com. https://github.com/search/. [Accessed 28-Jun-2023].
  19. GitHub. 2023b. GitHub GraphQL API documentation - GitHub Docs — docs.github.com. https://docs.github.com/en/graphql. [Accessed 28-Jun-2023].
  20. Giveth. 2023. Giveth: Welcome to the Future of Giving — giveth.io. https://giveth.io. [Accessed 28-Jun-2023].
  21. Language matters in twitter: A large scale study. In Proceedings of the international AAAI conference on web and social media, Vol. 5. 518–521.
  22. Guido W. Imbens and Donald B. Rubin. 2015. Causal Inference for Statistics, Social, and Biomedical Sciences: An Introduction. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139025751
  23. Herding a Deluge of Good Samaritans: How GitHub Projects Respond to Increased Attention. In Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020. 2055–2065.
  24. Are tweets useful in the bug fixing process? an empirical study on firefox and chrome. Empirical Software Engineering 23, 3 (2018), 1704–1742.
  25. Do Developers Discover New Tools on the Toilet?. In Proceedings of the 41st International Conference on Software Engineering (Montreal, Quebec, Canada) (ICSE ’19). IEEE Press, 465–475. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSE.2019.00059
  26. Are Donation Badges Appealing?: A Case Study of Developer Responses to Eclipse Bug Reports. IEEE Software 36, 03 (2019), 22–27.
  27. Validating recommendations for coronary angiography following acute myocardial infarction in the elderly: A matched analysis using propensity scores. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 54, 4 (2001), 387–398. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0895-4356(00)00321-8
  28. How to Not Get Rich: An Empirical Study of Donations in Open Source. In Proceedings of ACM/IEEE 42nd International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE ’20). 1209–1221.
  29. Patreon. 2023. Creativity powered by membership — Patreon — patreon.com. https://www.patreon.com/. [Accessed 28-Jun-2023].
  30. PayPal. 2023. Digital Wallets, Money Management, and More — paypal.com. https://www.paypal.com/. [Accessed 29-Jun-2023].
  31. The signals that potential contributors look for when choosing open-source projects. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 3, CSCW (2019), 1–29.
  32. Uzma Raja and Marietta J. Tretter. 2012. Defining and Evaluating a Measure of Open Source Project Survivability. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 38, 1 (2012), 163–174. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSE.2011.39
  33. Paid vs. volunteer work in open source. In Proceedings of 47th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS ’14). 3286–3295.
  34. Appropriate statistics for ordinal level data: Should we really be using t-test and Cohen’sd for evaluating group differences on the NSSE and other surveys. In annual meeting of the Florida Association of Institutional Research, Vol. 177. 34.
  35. GitHub Sponsors: Exploring a New Way to Contribute to Open Source. In Proceedings of the 44th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE ’22). 1058–1069. https://doi.org/10.1145/3510003.3510116
  36. Software engineering at the speed of light: how developers stay current using twitter. In Proceedings of the 36th International Conference on Software Engineering. 211–221.
  37. GitHub Sponsors. 2023. GitHub Sponsors — github.com. https://github.com/sponsors. [Accessed 28-Jun-2023].
  38. The impact of social media on software engineering practices and tools. In Proceedings of the FSE/SDP workshop on Future of software engineering research. 359–364.
  39. How social and communication channels shape and challenge a participatory culture in software development. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 43, 2 (2016), 185–204.
  40. What does software engineering community microblog about?. In 2012 9th IEEE Working Conference on Mining Software Repositories (MSR). IEEE, 247–250.
  41. Yuan Tian and David Lo. 2014. An exploratory study on software microblogger behaviors. In 2014 IEEE 4th Workshop on Mining Unstructured Data. IEEE, 1–5.
  42. Programming in a socially networked world: the evolution of the social programmer. In The Future of Collaborative Software Development. 1–3.
  43. Adding sparkle to social coding: an empirical study of repository badges in the npm ecosystem. In Proceedings of the 40th international conference on software engineering. 511–522.
  44. Twitter. 2022a. Twitter API Documentation — developer.twitter.com. https://developer.twitter.com/en/docs/twitter-api. [Accessed 28-Jun-2023].
  45. Twitter. 2022b. Twitter API for Academic Research — Products — developer.twitter.com. https://developer.twitter.com/en/products/twitter-api/academic-research. [Accessed 28-Jun-2023].
  46. Anthony Viera and Joanne Garrett. 2005. Understanding Interobserver Agreement: The Kappa Statistic. Family medicine (2005).
  47. The effects of remote work on collaboration among information workers. Nature Human Behaviour 6, 1 (01 Jan 2022), 43–54. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-021-01196-4
  48. Who, What, Why and How? Towards the Monetary Incentive in Crowd Collaboration: A Case Study of Github’s Sponsor Mechanism. In CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–18.
  49. Studying donations and their expenses in open source projects: a case study of GitHub projects collecting donations through open collectives. Empirical Software Engineering 27, 1 (2022), 1–38.
Citations (1)
View on Semantic Scholar

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

Ai Sparkles Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Summarize Now