Newcomers are critical for the success and continuity of open source software (OSS) projects. To attract newcomers and facilitate their onboarding, many OSS projects recommend tasks for newcomers, such as good first issues (GFIs). Previous studies have preliminarily investigated the effects of GFIs and techniques to identify suitable GFIs. However, it is still unclear whether just recommending tasks is enough and how significant mentoring is for newcomers. To better understand mentoring in OSS communities, we analyze the resolution process of 48,402 GFIs from 964 repositories through a mix-method approach. We investigate the extent, the mentorship structures, the discussed topics, and the relevance of expert involvement. We find that $\sim$70\% of GFIs have expert participation, with each GFI usually having one expert who makes two comments. Half of GFIs will receive their first expert comment within 8.5 hours after a newcomer comment. Through analysis of the collaboration networks of newcomers and experts, we observe that community mentorship presents four types of structure: centralized mentoring, decentralized mentoring, collaborative mentoring, and distributed mentoring. As for discussed topics, we identify 14 newcomer challenges and 18 expert mentoring content. By fitting the generalized linear models, we find that expert involvement positively correlates with newcomers' successful contributions but negatively correlates with newcomers' retention. Our study manifests the status and significance of mentoring in the OSS projects, which provides rich practical implications for optimizing the mentoring process and helping newcomers contribute smoothly and successfully.
翻译:为了吸引新来者并便利他们上岗,许多开放源码软件项目建议新来者的任务,例如良好的第一问题(GFI)。我们发现,GFI的70美元是专家参与的,每个GFI通常有一位专家作两次评论,但尚不清楚的是,仅仅建议任务是否足够,对新来者的指导有多大。为了更好地了解开放源码软件社区的指导,我们通过混合方法分析964个储存库的48,402个GFI的解决方案进程。我们调查了指导结构、讨论的专题和专家参与的相关性。我们发现,GFI的专家参与程度为70美元,每个GFI通常有一位专家作两次评论。半数全球FI在新来者评论后8小时内将获得他们的第一个专家评论。通过分析新来者和专家的协作网络,我们观察到社区指导提供了四种成功的结构:集中指导、分散指导、协作指导以及分配指导。我们通过积极讨论主题,确定18项专家参与的准确性研究,我们提出了18项专家的准确性评估性评估。