journal article·2025-01-18Open access

Analyzing Key Features of Open Source Software Survivability with Random Forest

Sohee Park, Gihwon Kwon

Applied Sciences· Volume 15· Issue 2

Abstract

Open source software (OSS) projects rely on voluntary contributions, but their long-term survivability depends on sustained community engagement and effective problem-solving. Survivability, critical for maintaining project quality and trustworthiness, is closely linked to issue activity, as unresolved issues reflect a decline in maintenance capacity and problem-solving ability. Thus, analyzing issue retention rates provides valuable insights into a project’s health. This study evaluates OSS survivability by identifying the features that influence issue activity and analyzing their relationships with survivability. Kaplan–Meier survival analysis is employed to quantify issue activity and visualize trends in unresolved issue rates, providing a measure of project maintenance dynamics. A random forest model is used to examine the relationships between project features—such as popularity metrics, community engagement, code complexity, and project age—and issue retention rates. The results show that stars significantly reduce issue retention rates, with rates dropping from 0.62 to 0.52 as stars increase to 4000, while larger codebases, higher cyclomatic complexity, and older project age are associated with unresolved issue rates, rising by up to 15%. Forks also have a nonlinear impact, initially stabilizing retention rates but increasing unresolved issues as contributions became unmanageable. By identifying these critical factors and quantifying their impacts, this research offers actionable insights for OSS project managers to enhance project survivability and address key maintenance challenges, ensuring sustainable long-term success.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Open Source Software Innovations · Software Engineering Research · Software Engineering Techniques and Practices

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Department of SW Safety and Cyber Security, Kyonggi University, Suwon-si 16227, Gyeonggi-do, Republic of Korea

Funding

Institute of Information & Communications Technology Planning & Evaluation (IITP)

References (23)

Show source-provided references
1. Feller, J., and Fitzgerald, B. (2002). Understanding Open Source Software Development, Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc.
2. From a firm-based to a community-based model of knowledge creation: The case of the Linux kernel development10.1287/orsc.14.6.633.24866 ↗
3. Motivation, governance, and the viability of hybrid forms in open source software development10.1287/mnsc.1060.0553 ↗
4. Cheng, J., and Guo, J.L.C. (2019, January 27). Activity-based analysis of open source software contributors: Roles and dynamics. Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE/ACM 12th International Workshop on Cooperative and Human Aspects of Software Engineering (CHASE), Montreal, QC, Canada.10.1109/CHASE.2019.00011 ↗
5. Defining, understanding, and supporting open collaboration: Lessons from the literature10.1177/0002764212469362 ↗
6. Russo Latona, G., Gote, C., Zingg, C., Casiraghi, G., Verginer, L., and Schweitzer, F. (2024, January 13–17). Shock! Quantifying the impact of core developers’ dropout on the productivity of OSS projects. Proceedings of the Companion Proceedings of the ACM on Web Conference 2024, Singapore.10.1145/3589335.3651559 ↗
7. Coelho, J., and Valente, M.T. (2017, January 4–8). Why modern open source projects fail. Proceedings of the 2017 11th Joint Meeting on Foundations of Software Engineering, Paderborn, Germany.10.1145/3106237.3106246 ↗
8. Miller, C., Kästner, C., and Vasilescu, B. (2023, January 3–9). “We feel like we’re winging it”: A study on navigating open-source dependency abandonment. Proceedings of the ESEC/FSE ’23: ACM Joint European Software Engineering Conference and Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering, San Francisco, CA, USA.10.1145/3611643.3616293 ↗
9. Adopters’ trust in enterprise open source vendors: An empirical examination10.1016/j.jss.2016.12.006 ↗
10. How do firms make use of open source communities?10.1016/j.lrp.2008.09.003 ↗
11. Mining GitHub for factors that affect open source software sustainability
12. Surgical teams on GitHub: Modeling performance of GitHub project development processes10.1016/j.infsof.2018.03.010 ↗
13. Ait, A., Izquierdo, J.L.C., and Cabot, J. (2022, January 23–24). An empirical study on the survival rate of GitHub projects. Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Mining Software Repositories, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.10.1145/3524842.3527941 ↗
14. Han, J., Deng, S., Xia, X., Wang, D., and Yin, J. (2019, January 15–19). Characterization and prediction of popular projects on GitHub. Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE 43rd Annual Computer Software and Applications Conference (COMPSAC), Milwaukee, WI, USA.10.1109/COMPSAC.2019.00013 ↗
15. Zhou, H., Ravi, H., Muniz, C.M., Azizi, V., Ness, L., de Melo, G., and Kapadia, M. (2020). Gitevolve: Predicting the evolution of GitHub repositories. arXiv.
16. Eluri, V.K., Sarkani, S., and Mazzuchi, T.A. (October, January 30). Open source software survivability prediction using multi layer perceptron. Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Software Engineering and Data Engineering, San Diego, CA, USA.
17. GAP: Forecasting commit activity in Git projects10.1016/j.jss.2020.110573 ↗
18. Avelino, G., Constantinou, E., Valente, M.T., and Serebrenik, A. (2019, January 19–20). On the abandonment and survival of open source projects: An empirical investigation. Proceedings of the 2019 ACM/IEEE International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement (ESEM), Recife, Brazil.10.1109/ESEM.2019.8870181 ↗
19. Dabbish, L., Stuart, C., Tsay, J., and Herbsleb, J. (2012, January 11–15). Social coding in GitHub: Transparency and collaboration in an open software repository. Proceedings of the ACM 2012 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, Seattle, WA, USA.10.1145/2145204.2145396 ↗
20. Borges, H., Hora, A., and Valente, M.T. (2016, January 7). Predicting the popularity of GitHub repositories. Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Predictive Models and Data Analytics in Software Engineering, Ciudad Real, Spain.10.1145/2972958.2972966 ↗
21. Borges, H., Hora, A., and Valente, M.T. (2016, January 2–7). Understanding the factors that impact the popularity of GitHub repositories. Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance and Evolution (ICSME), Raleigh, NC, USA.10.1109/ICSME.2016.31 ↗
22. Cyclomatic complexity10.1109/MS.2016.147 ↗
23. Collett, D. (2023). Modelling Survival Data in Medical Research, Chapman and Hall/CRC.10.1201/9781003282525 ↗