Transcript Online Design Discussion

Online Design Discussion
Rami Akkad
FU Berlin
Open Source Seminar - WS 2008/2009
Tutor: Christopher Oezbek
Note: All graphics used in this presentation are taken from the focused paper „A socio-cognitive analysis of online design discussions in an
Open Source Software community“, F. Barcellini et al. | Interacting with Computers 20 (2008)
Contents
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Introduction
Theoretical Framework / Research strategy
Methods
Results
Summary
Discussion
2
Introduction - OSS
• Open Source Software is a constantly growing market
• Widely used
• Projects like Linux, Mozilla or Apache well known
• An OSS community is geographically distributed and
asynchronous
• Problems are discussed online in discussion spaces
• Mailing lists
• Forums
• Wikis
3
Introduction – Python project
• The study focuses on the Python project community
• Project has less than 100 developers involved
• Produced code is reasonable
• It has all qualities common OSS projects have
• Past studies made by colleagues focused on python
• They had work the could rely on
4
Contents
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Introduction
Theoretical Framework / Research strategy
Methods
Results
Summary
Discussion
5
Theoretical Framework / Research
Strategy
• Five different types of participants are recognized:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
The project leader
The core team or administrators
Developers
Active users
Passive users
The status of a participant may improve during online
disucssions.
6
Situation at the time of study (2002)
• Core group of seven people:
– Project leader
– Six administrators
• Discussion space seperated into three design spaces:
– Documentation Space
– Discussion Space
– Implementation Space
7
Situation at the time of study (2002)
8
Python Enhancement Proposal (PEP)
• The PEP process is used to discuss and handle design
related proposals
• It protocols everything related to a proposal
• A PEP proposer is called „champion“
9
Python Enhancement Proposal (PEP)
• Example:
1. Champion sends PEP to an editor
2. Editor checks usability of the PEP.
If confirmed, PEP will be published.
3. PEP will be discussed.
4. PEP is approved by the community.
5. Project leader gives his agreement.
6. Code for PEP will be written and implemented into the
Python language.
10
Quotation
• Quoting techniques are used in order to maintain context
• A message quoting another message is seen as a
response to the message quoted
• Quotation is widley distributed in the Python project
discussion space
11
Three aspects of online discussion
dynamics
• The study focuses on the discussoin space, specifically on
the python-dev mailing list
• Three aspects of online discussion dynamics are
analyzed:
1. Social dynamics
2. Thematic temporal dynamics
3. Design dynamics
•
A combination of strutural and content analyses of the
online discussions is used to obtain the result data
12
Social dynamics
• Characterizes the influence of participants in design
discussions
– How do they evolve?
• Relationship between the status of the posters and their
involvment in the discussion based on:
–
–
–
–
The
The
The
The
number of posted messages
type of quotation structure
depth of a quotation
position in the discussion
13
Thematic temporal dynamics
• Show how design themes emerge and evolve over time
• Design themes adressed by each messages are analyzed
– Provides characterization of organization and temporal
emergence of themes in discussions
• Degree of synchronism/asynchronism of messages will be
calculated
14
Design dynamics
• Characterizes how collaborative design work leads to the
final design
• Which sequences of activities / which discussion led to the
final design?
• Messages containing posts with design-alternatives were
chosen
• This is a content-based analysis
15
Contents
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Introduction
Theoretical Framework / Research strategy
Methods
Results
Summary
Discussion
16
Collection of data
• PEP discussions are all archieved and published online
• At the time of study, 161 PEPs were discussed
• The python-dev mailing list has been searched (by hand)
for PEP-related discussion
• 13 PEPs have been found, 8 PEPs are design-related
• Among those, 3 have been just created and were chosen
to capture the core of the design process
17
Collection of data
• Two of these three PEPs were compared: PEP 279 and
PEP 285
• Both had the same status (accepted and implemented)
• Both were at the same stage in the design process
• Both adressed the introduction of new functionality
18
PEP 279 / PEP 285
• PEP 279 was proposed by a developer
• PEP 285 was proposed by the project leader
 they differed in the social position of their respective champion
• PEP 279: 71 messages posted by 21 authors; 3600 lines of text
• PEP 285: 95 messages posted by 22 authors; 3500 lines of text
• PEP processes were compared by analyzing one main discussion
for each PEP
19
Data collection: Social view
• Four types of participants were identified in the pythondev mailing list:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Project leader (PL)
Champion of the PEP (C)
Administrators (A)
Developers (D)
20
Data collection: Social view
• Involvement of a participant in the online discussion is
categorized by a median number of messages posted:
More than two messages posted:
–
–
High participant administrator (HP-A)
High participant developer (HP-D)
Two or fewer messages posted:
–
–
Low participant administrator (LP-A)
Low participant developer (LP-D)
21
Data collection: Social view
Quotation
• A line is recognized as a quotation if it starts with a „>“,
for example:
xxx writes:
>So now I’d like to choose between enumerate() and indexer(). Any
>closing arguments?
“indexer” is the name of the built-in full-text indexer, right? ;-)
– Three types of messages:
• Text only messages(no quotation)
• Single quote messages(one block of quotation followed by a comment)
• Multiple quote messages(alternating quotes and comments)
example
22
Data collection: Social view
• Quotation patterns:
– Sequential structure: a message is quoted by only one
message
– Branching structure: a message is quoted by two or more
messages
– Closing structure: a message is not quoted at all
23
Data collection:
Thematic temporal view
• Themes adressed for each message were identified
• There were five themes in the PEP 279 discussion
• And six themes in the PEP 285 discussion
24
Data collection:
Thematic temporal view
• PEP 279 discussion themes:
(T1):
(T2):
(T3):
(T4):
(T5):
Choice of a name
Alternative syntaxes for the proposed function
Utility of the proposed function
Error handling
Orthogonal problem of name binding / status of
name spaces (technical issue)
25
Data collection:
Thematic temporal view
• PEP 285 discussion themes:
(T1):
(T2):
(T3):
(T4):
(T5):
(T6):
Consequences of a new build-in data type
Specific function (return type)
Name of the constant of the new build-in type
Elimination of non-boolean operations on booleans
Specific operator of Python and its return value
Inheritance relationship between two types
T1 is a “meta-theme”: Possible impacts this change could
have are discussed within the community.
26
Data collection:
Design view
Design alternatives
• Design alternatives proposed in both PEPs were analyzed
Proposed design alternatives:
– PEP 279/T1: 23
– PEP 279/T2: 8
– PEP 279/T3: 3
– PEP 285/T1-T6: 3
27
Data collection:
Design view
Design activities
• Seven different design activities were identified from the
content of messages:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Proposal
Evaluation
Group coordination
Synthesis
Clarification
Explicit Decision
Other activities
28
Contents
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Introduction
Theoretical Framework / Research strategy
Methods
Results
Summary
Discussion
29
Results – Social view
Distribution of statuses and involvement in the
discussions
30
Results – Social view
Quotation activities
31
Results – Social view
Position of participants and their used quotation structure
32
Results – Social view
Position of participants and their used quotation structure
33
Results – Social view
Position of participants and their used quotation structure
34
Results – Social view
Position of participants and their used quotation structure
• PEP 279:
Branching structure  PL or C
Sequental structure  D
Closing message  PL
• PEP 285:
Branching structure  PL or LP-D
Sequental structure  HP-D
Closing message  LP-A or HP-A
35
Results – Social view
Depth of quotation
36
Results – Thematic temporal view
37
Results – Thematic temporal view
 Small degree of asynchronism
38
Results – Design view
Design alternatives
• Branching structures result from messages containing
more than one design alternative proposals
• Closing messages include one or zero alternative
proposals
• In PEP 279 discussion alternatives were posted mostly by
– C
– PL
– LP-Ds
 C and PL are very important in the design process
39
Results – Design view
Design activities in comments
40
Results – Design view
Design activities in quotes
41
Results – Design view
Sequences of activities
• Which activities are followed by which activity?
• Characterization of the way information and knowledge is
gathered in the community
42
Results – Design view
Sequences of activities
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
Evaluation  Evaluation
Proposal  Evaluation or proposal
Clarification  Evaluation or proposal
Coordination  Coordination
Decision  Coordination
43
Contents
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Introduction
Theoretical Framework / Research strategy
Methods
Results
Summary
Discussion
44
Summary – Social dynamics
•
Project Leader has the absolute authority over the
project
–
–
Messages posted by the PL lead to multiple branches
Messages posted by the PL usually contain multi-quotes
•
Only the Champion writes synthesis to gather the
information of previous posts
•
Messages posted by administrators occured in three
different positions
–
–
–
At a beginning branching position
In linear exchanges with developers
In closing positions (acting as the PL when he was not
available)
45
Summary – Social dynamics
•
Messagess posted by developers occurred in two
different positions
–
–
In PEP 285 at a beginning branching position
In PEP 279 in linear sequences of exchanges with other
participants
 Developers are actively participating in the design process
46
Summary – Thematic temporal
dynamics
•
Quotation technique used is based on selective quoting
–
•
Lines neccesary to preserve context are chosen
The timeframe patricipants react to a proposal or a
message is different
–
–
–
If a message is considered important, the answer usually
apperas within hours
Certain moments exist in a design-oriented, distributed
online-discussion where communication can be seen as
synchronous
Implicit social rules exist in the community; if a certain
issue is not answered by the adressed participant “in time”,
he could lose his social status within the community
47
Summary – Design dynamics
•
The two most important activities are evaluation and
clarification
•
Few decisions are taken during the online discussions
–
But those taken are explicit
•
A participants status does not affect the design process
he is engaged in
•
Patterns of activity interchange do not differ to face-toface discussions
48
Questions?
49
Contents
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Introduction
Theoretical Framework / Research strategy
Methods
Results
Summary
Discussion
50
Discussion
•
Are the three analyzed dynamic aspects wise?
•
Is it wise, to focus only on one project?
•
Is it wise, to focus only on two PEPs in this project and
among them only on one discussion?
•
Is further research essential to provide a representative
study which characterizes OSS discussions in all of its
aspects?
51
Thank you!
52