Panel Discussion: Measuring Suc...
summary
CHAOSS Academic Working Group (formed 2023) finds most CHAOSS metrics don’t map to university needs and distills ~37 academic goals to new measures, highlighting grants as the main driver of short lived projects and chronic maintenance gaps. Concrete tools and practices discussed include software citation with ORCID and citation metadata, DOI via Zenodo for reproducible snapshots, dashboards to surface single‑maintainer risk, the Curious Network and university ASOs, and an empirical note that ~20 students got merges out of ~1,000 over seven years.
AI-written summary · about
chapters (9)
- 0:00Welcome
- 1:46Academic open source challenges
- 7:02Academic vs industry projects
- 15:27Defining success
- 21:50Metrics gaps in academia
- 25:42Tracking citations and impact
- 29:14Project longevity
- 33:50Student involvement in open source
- 39:52Final thoughts
related talks
43mMeasuring Suc...
36mPanel Discussion: OSS Viability and Project...
43mBuilding and Supporting Open Source Communities Through Metrics
33mData to Action: Build Healthy & Sustainable OSS Communities
26mBuilding & Supporting Open Source Communities Through Metrics
41mBuilding and Supporting Open Source Communities Through Metri...
39mBuilding SaaS Services with CHAOSS Technology to Evaluate Community Health and Sustainability
34mAssessing Project Risk Using CHAOSS Metrics
