The reviewed record of science sign in
Pith

arxiv: 2607.01494 · v1 · pith:4RLUXANY · submitted 2026-07-01 · cs.SE · cs.ET· cs.HC· cs.SI

Insights from GitHub Community on the Matter Standard: Developer Perspectives and Challenges

Muhammad Hassan , Carl Gunter , Susan Landau , Masooda Bashir This is my paper

Reviewed by Pith T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 kernel 2026-07-03 19:01 UTCgrok-4.3pith:4RLUXANYrecord.jsonopen to challenge →

classification cs.SE cs.ETcs.HCcs.SI
keywords Matter standardIoT interoperabilityGitHub issuestopic modelingdeveloper challengesProject CHIPtesting infrastructuresmart home devices
0
0 comments X

The pith

Analysis of 13,000 GitHub issues shows Matter IoT developers face recurring problems in testing, interoperability, development, and platform support.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper examines developer reports in the official Matter repository to map out the day-to-day difficulties of building with the standard. It applies topic modeling to surface four persistent categories of issues and then uses qualitative review to trace how those categories appear in changes to the code and tools. A sympathetic reader would care because Matter was created to fix device compatibility across vendors, yet these implementation frictions could slow real-world rollout if left unaddressed. The study also notes how the same concerns recur as the project evolves, suggesting they are structural rather than one-off.

Core claim

By processing more than 13,000 issues posted to the Project CHIP GitHub repository, the authors identify four recurring areas of developer concern—Testing, Interoperability, Development, and Platform and Network—and show how each area surfaces in the ongoing changes to the Matter codebase and its associated tooling.

What carries the argument

Topic modeling followed by qualitative analysis of GitHub issues from the official Matter repository.

If this is right

  • Targeted changes to test infrastructure could directly reduce the volume of testing-related issues reported by contributors.
  • Clearer cross-vendor integration guidance would address the interoperability problems that appear repeatedly in the data.
  • Updated documentation focused on development practices and platform requirements could lower barriers for new implementers.
  • Continued monitoring of these four areas as the codebase evolves would help the standard mature with fewer integration setbacks.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same issue-mining method could be applied to other open IoT or smart-home standards to compare their developer pain points.
  • Platform and network concerns may translate into measurable differences in device reliability once Matter products reach consumer environments.
  • Early investment in better testing tools might reduce the overall number of interoperability issues that surface later in the development cycle.

Load-bearing premise

The issues posted in the official Project CHIP repository capture the typical challenges faced by most developers working with Matter.

What would settle it

A broad survey of Matter implementers who never posted to the official repository that ranks different concerns as primary would indicate the GitHub sample is not representative.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.01494 by Carl Gunter, Masooda Bashir, Muhammad Hassan, Susan Landau.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Number of Users vs Number of Issues Reported [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Number of Issues Reported Over Time by Each Category [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Matter seeks to resolve longstanding interoperability problems in the Internet of Things (IoT), yet little is known about how developers experience the standard in day to day work. This paper examines over 13,000 issues from the official Project CHIP GitHub repository to understand the kinds of problems contributors report when implementing and integrating Matter. Using topic modeling and qualitative analysis, we identify four recurring areas of concern, Testing, Interoperability, Development, and Platform and Network, and describe how they manifest in the evolution of the codebase and tooling. The findings reveal systematic technical and integration challenges and point to concrete opportunities to refine Matter's test infrastructure, cross vendor guidance, and documentation as the standard continues to mature.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The paper analyzes over 13,000 GitHub issues from the official Project CHIP repository using topic modeling and qualitative analysis. It identifies four recurring areas of developer concern when implementing and integrating the Matter standard—Testing, Interoperability, Development, and Platform and Network—and describes how these manifest in the evolution of the codebase and tooling, pointing to opportunities for refining test infrastructure, cross-vendor guidance, and documentation.

Significance. If the findings hold, the work supplies an empirical view of practical challenges in adopting the Matter IoT interoperability standard drawn from a large public issue corpus. This could usefully inform standard evolution and tooling improvements in a domain where developer experience data has been scarce.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract / implied methods] The central claim (abstract) that the four areas represent recurring developer challenges rests on the assumption that issues in the single official Project CHIP repository form a representative sample. The repository primarily hosts the reference implementation; issues are self-selected reports from its contributors. This risks under-representing proprietary vendor implementations, closed-source integrations, or challenges that never surface on GitHub. No triangulation with other repositories, vendor surveys, or external data is described.
  2. [Abstract / implied methods] The abstract states that topic modeling and qualitative analysis were used to derive the four areas, yet supplies no information on topic validation, data filtering criteria applied to the >13k issues, or inter-rater reliability measures for the qualitative coding. Without these details the robustness of the reported themes cannot be assessed.
minor comments (1)
  1. The manuscript would benefit from an explicit limitations subsection addressing sample bias and generalizability.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive feedback on the scope of our data source and the transparency of our methods. We address each major comment below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract / implied methods] The central claim (abstract) that the four areas represent recurring developer challenges rests on the assumption that issues in the single official Project CHIP repository form a representative sample. The repository primarily hosts the reference implementation; issues are self-selected reports from its contributors. This risks under-representing proprietary vendor implementations, closed-source integrations, or challenges that never surface on GitHub. No triangulation with other repositories, vendor surveys, or external data is described.

    Authors: We agree that the analysis is limited to issues from the single official Project CHIP repository, which hosts the reference implementation. This sample is self-selected and may under-represent challenges from proprietary or closed-source implementations. We will revise the abstract and add a Limitations section to explicitly state the scope of the repository and note the lack of triangulation with other sources such as vendor surveys or additional repositories. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Abstract / implied methods] The abstract states that topic modeling and qualitative analysis were used to derive the four areas, yet supplies no information on topic validation, data filtering criteria applied to the >13k issues, or inter-rater reliability measures for the qualitative coding. Without these details the robustness of the reported themes cannot be assessed.

    Authors: The manuscript's Methods section describes the topic modeling (LDA) and qualitative analysis steps, but we acknowledge that additional details on validation, filtering, and reliability are needed for full transparency. We will expand the Methods section to specify the data filtering criteria for the >13k issues, topic validation procedures (e.g., coherence metrics and manual inspection), and inter-rater reliability measures for the qualitative coding. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

Empirical analysis of external GitHub data shows no circularity

full rationale

The paper is a purely empirical study that collects and analyzes >13k public GitHub issues from the Project CHIP repository via topic modeling and qualitative coding. No equations, parameters, derivations, or self-citations are load-bearing; the four identified concern areas are direct outputs of the observed issue text. The central claim therefore does not reduce to its inputs by construction and is self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Empirical study with no mathematical derivations, free parameters, or postulated entities.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5654 in / 956 out tokens · 30449 ms · 2026-07-03T19:01:43.300893+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

68 extracted references · 68 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Challenges in chatbot development: A study of stack overflow posts

    Ahmad Abdellatif, Diego Costa, Khaled Badran, Rabe Abdalkareem, and Emad Shihab. Challenges in chatbot development: A study of stack overflow posts. InProceedings of the 17th international conference on mining software repositories, pages 174–185, 2020

    work page 2020

  2. [2]

    What is wrong with topic modeling? and how to fix it using search-based software engineering.Information and Software Technology, 98:74–88, 2018

    Amritanshu Agrawal, Wei Fu, and Tim Menzies. What is wrong with topic modeling? and how to fix it using search-based software engineering.Information and Software Technology, 98:74–88, 2018

    work page 2018

  3. [3]

    Iot adoption and application for smart healthcare: a systematic review.Sensors, 22(14):5377, 2022

    Manal Al-Rawashdeh, Pantea Keikhosrokiani, Bahari Belaton, Moatsum Alawida, and Abdalwhab Zwiri. Iot adoption and application for smart healthcare: a systematic review.Sensors, 22(14):5377, 2022

    work page 2022

  4. [4]

    Improving code review with github issue tracking

    Abduljaleel Al-Rubaye and Gita Sukthankar. Improving code review with github issue tracking. In2022 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining (ASONAM), pages 210–217. IEEE, 2022

    work page 2022

  5. [5]

    Matter 1.0 is here - does reality meet expectation?, 2025

    Rob Alexander. Matter 1.0 is here - does reality meet expectation?, 2025

    work page 2025

  6. [6]

    Matter faqs — frequently asked questions, 2025

    Connectivity Standards Alliance. Matter faqs — frequently asked questions, 2025

    work page 2025

  7. [7]

    Is fragmentation a threat to the success of the internet of things?IEEE Internet of Things Journal, 6(1):472–487, 2018

    Mohab Aly, Foutse Khomh, Yann-Ga ¨el Gu´eh´eneuc, Hironori Washizaki, and Soumaya Yacout. Is fragmentation a threat to the success of the internet of things?IEEE Internet of Things Journal, 6(1):472–487, 2018

    work page 2018

  8. [8]

    Going big: a large-scale study on what big data developers ask

    Mehdi Bagherzadeh and Raffi Khatchadourian. Going big: a large-scale study on what big data developers ask. InProceedings of the 2019 27th ACM joint meeting on european software engineering conference and symposium on the foundations of software engineering, pages 432–442, 2019

    work page 2019

  9. [9]

    Connectivity standards alliance matter: State of the art and opportunities.Internet of Things, 25:101005, 2024

    Dimitri Belli, Paolo Barsocchi, and Filippo Palumbo. Connectivity standards alliance matter: State of the art and opportunities.Internet of Things, 25:101005, 2024

    work page 2024

  10. [10]

    Got technical debt? surfacing elusive technical debt in issue trackers

    Stephany Bellomo, Robert L Nord, Ipek Ozkaya, and Mary Popeck. Got technical debt? surfacing elusive technical debt in issue trackers. InProceedings of the 13th international conference on mining software repositories, pages 327–338, 2016

    work page 2016

  11. [11]

    Bissyand´e, David Lo, Lingxiao Jiang, Laurent R ´eveill`ere, Jacques Klein, and Yves Le Traon

    Tegawend ´e F. Bissyand´e, David Lo, Lingxiao Jiang, Laurent R ´eveill`ere, Jacques Klein, and Yves Le Traon. Got issues? who cares about it? a large scale investigation of issue trackers from github. In2013 IEEE 24th International Symposium on Software Reliability Engineering (ISSRE), pages 188–197, 2013

    work page 2013

  12. [12]

    Csa announces matter 1.2 with many improvements - embedded computing design, 2023

    Ken Briodagh. Csa announces matter 1.2 with many improvements - embedded computing design, 2023

    work page 2023

  13. [13]

    How do developers deal with security issue reports on github? InProceedings of the 37th ACM/SIGAPP Symposium on Applied Computing, pages 1580–1589, 2022

    Noah B ¨uhlmann and Mohammad Ghafari. How do developers deal with security issue reports on github? InProceedings of the 37th ACM/SIGAPP Symposium on Applied Computing, pages 1580–1589, 2022

    work page 2022

  14. [14]

    Topic modeling using latent dirichlet allocation: A survey.ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR), 54(7):1–35, 2021

    Uttam Chauhan and Apurva Shah. Topic modeling using latent dirichlet allocation: A survey.ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR), 54(7):1–35, 2021

    work page 2021

  15. [15]

    Matter (connectedhomeip) github repository

    Project CHIP. Matter (connectedhomeip) github repository. Available at: https://github.com/project-chip/connectedhomeip

    work page

  16. [16]

    Connectivity standards alliance

    Connectivity Standards Alliance. Connectivity standards alliance. https: //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Connectivity Standards Alliance, May 2024

    work page 2024

  17. [17]

    Matter 1.2 arrives with nine new device types & improvements across the board, Oct 2023

    CSA. Matter 1.2 arrives with nine new device types & improvements across the board, Oct 2023. Press Release

    work page 2023

  18. [18]

    The enterprise love affair with github cloud, Sep 2023

    Andy Dennis. The enterprise love affair with github cloud, Sep 2023

    work page 2023

  19. [19]

    On measuring affects of github issues’ commenters

    Giuseppe Destefanis, Marco Ortu, David Bowes, Michele Marchesi, and Roberto Tonelli. On measuring affects of github issues’ commenters. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop on Emotion Awareness in Software Engineering, pages 14–19, 2018

    work page 2018

  20. [20]

    100 million developers and counting, Jan 2023

    Thomas Dohmke. 100 million developers and counting, Jan 2023

    work page 2023

  21. [21]

    PhD thesis, 2015

    Joseph Feliciano.Towards a collaborative learning platform: The use of GitHub in computer science and software engineering courses. PhD thesis, 2015

    work page 2015

  22. [22]

    Understanding collaborative practices and tools of professional ux practitioners in software organizations

    KJ Kevin Feng, Tony W Li, and Amy X Zhang. Understanding collaborative practices and tools of professional ux practitioners in software organizations. InProceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pages 1–20, 2023

    work page 2023

  23. [23]

    Visualizing github issues

    Aron Fiechter, Roberto Minelli, Csaba Nagy, and Michele Lanza. Visualizing github issues. In2021 Working Conference on Software Visualization (VISSOFT), pages 155–159. IEEE, 2021

    work page 2021

  24. [24]

    Challenges in docker development: A large-scale study using stack overflow

    Mubin Ul Haque, Leonardo Horn Iwaya, and M Ali Babar. Challenges in docker development: A large-scale study using stack overflow. InPro- ceedings of the 14th ACM/IEEE international symposium on empirical software engineering and measurement (ESEM), pages 1–11, 2020

    work page 2020

  25. [25]

    Here’s what the “matter” smart home standard is all about, Oct 2023

    Simon Hill. Here’s what the “matter” smart home standard is all about, Oct 2023

    work page 2023

  26. [26]

    Building bridges between zigbee and matter, Apr 2025

    Charlie Ice. Building bridges between zigbee and matter, Apr 2025

    work page 2025

  27. [27]

    With amazon, apple and google onboard, this new alliance aims to make your smart home work properly, Mar 2020

    Cliff Joseph. With amazon, apple and google onboard, this new alliance aims to make your smart home work properly, Mar 2020

    work page 2020

  28. [28]

    An in-depth study of the promises and perils of mining github.Empirical Software Engineering, 21:2035–2071, 2016

    Eirini Kalliamvakou, Georgios Gousios, Kelly Blincoe, Leif Singer, Daniel M German, and Daniela Damian. An in-depth study of the promises and perils of mining github.Empirical Software Engineering, 21:2035–2071, 2016

    work page 2035

  29. [29]

    Perceived language complexity in github issue discussions and their effect on issue resolution

    David Kavaler, Sasha Sirovica, Vincent Hellendoorn, Raul Aranovich, and Vladimir Filkov. Perceived language complexity in github issue discussions and their effect on issue resolution. In2017 32nd IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE), pages 72–83. IEEE, 2017

    work page 2017

  30. [30]

    Introduction to matter — silicon labs matter, 2025

    Silicon Labs. Introduction to matter — silicon labs matter, 2025

    work page 2025

  31. [31]

    A survey of devops concepts and challenges.ACM computing surveys (CSUR), 52(6):1–35, 2019

    Leonardo Leite, Carla Rocha, Fabio Kon, Dejan Milojicic, and Paulo Meirelles. A survey of devops concepts and challenges.ACM computing surveys (CSUR), 52(6):1–35, 2019

    work page 2019

  32. [32]

    Motivations, barriers and risks of smart home adoption: From systematic literature review to conceptual framework.Energy Research & Social Science, 80:102211, 2021

    Wenda Li, Tan Yigitcanlar, Isil Erol, and Aaron Liu. Motivations, barriers and risks of smart home adoption: From systematic literature review to conceptual framework.Energy Research & Social Science, 80:102211, 2021

    work page 2021

  33. [33]

    Wip: Hidden hub eaves- dropping attack in matter-enabled smart home systems

    Song Liao, Jingwen Yan, and Long Cheng. Wip: Hidden hub eaves- dropping attack in matter-enabled smart home systems. InWorkshop on Security and Privacy in Standardized IoT (SDIoTSec), 2024

    work page 2024

  34. [34]

    Exploring the characteristics of issue-related behaviors in github using visualization techniques.IEEE Access, 6:24003–24015, 2018

    Zhifang Liao, Dayu He, Zhijie Chen, Xiaoping Fan, Yan Zhang, and Shengzong Liu. Exploring the characteristics of issue-related behaviors in github using visualization techniques.IEEE Access, 6:24003–24015, 2018

    work page 2018

  35. [35]

    Coding together at scale: Github as a collaborative social network

    Antonio Lima, Luca Rossi, and Mirco Musolesi. Coding together at scale: Github as a collaborative social network. InProceedings of the international AAAI conference on web and social media, volume 8, pages 295–304, 2014

    work page 2014

  36. [36]

    Building a collaborative culture: a grounded theory of well succeeded devops adoption in practice

    Welder Pinheiro Luz, Gustavo Pinto, and Rodrigo Bonif ´acio. Building a collaborative culture: a grounded theory of well succeeded devops adoption in practice. InProceedings of the 12th acm/ieee international symposium on empirical software engineering and measurement, pages 1–10, 2018

    work page 2018

  37. [37]

    The struggle is real! the agony of recruiting participants for empirical software engineering studies

    Kashumi Madampe, John Grundy, Rashina Hoda, and Humphrey Obie. The struggle is real! the agony of recruiting participants for empirical software engineering studies. In2024 IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing (VL/HCC), pages 417–422. IEEE, 2024

    work page 2024

  38. [38]

    Factors influencing the adoption of iot for e- learning in higher educational institutes in developing countries.Fron- tiers in Psychology, 13:915596, 2022

    Syed Hamid Hussain Madni, Javed Ali, Hafiz Ali Husnain, Maidul Hasan Masum, Saad Mustafa, Junaid Shuja, Mohammed Maray, and Samira Hosseini. Factors influencing the adoption of iot for e- learning in higher educational institutes in developing countries.Fron- tiers in Psychology, 13:915596, 2022

    work page 2022

  39. [39]

    Working with iot–a case study detailing workplace digitalization through iot system adop- tion

    Viktor M ¨ahler and Ulrika Holmstr ¨om Westergren. Working with iot–a case study detailing workplace digitalization through iot system adop- tion. InInternet of Things. Information Processing in an Increasingly Connected World: First IFIP International Cross-Domain Conference, IFIPIoT 2018, Held at the 24th IFIP World Computer Congress, WCC 2018, Poznan, ...

    work page 2018

  40. [40]

    Designing and evaluating a testbed for the matter protocol: Insights into user experience

    Ravindra Mangar, Jingyu Qian, Wondimu Zegeye, Abdulrahman AlRabah, Ben Civjan, Shalni Sundram, Sam Yuan, Carl A Gunter, Mounib Khanafer, Kevin Kornegay, et al. Designing and evaluating a testbed for the matter protocol: Insights into user experience. www. ndss-symposium. org, 2024

    work page 2024

  41. [41]

    On the relationship between design discussions and design quality: a case study of apache projects

    Umme Ayda Mannan, Iftekhar Ahmed, Carlos Jensen, and Anita Sarma. On the relationship between design discussions and design quality: a case study of apache projects. InProceedings of the 28th ACM Joint Meeting on European Software Engineering Conference and Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering, pages 543–555, 2020. 9

    work page 2020

  42. [42]

    The fragmented smart home: A comprehensive analysis of available interoperable solutions to connect wireless smart home communications, 2021

    Ludwig Masreliez. The fragmented smart home: A comprehensive analysis of available interoperable solutions to connect wireless smart home communications, 2021

    work page 2021

  43. [43]

    Qualitative re- search on software development: a longitudinal case study methodology

    Laurie McLeod, Stephen G MacDonell, and Bill Doolin. Qualitative re- search on software development: a longitudinal case study methodology. Empirical software engineering, 16:430–459, 2011

    work page 2011

  44. [44]

    A preliminary study on the assign- ment of github issues to issue commenters and the relationship with social smells

    Haris Mumtaz, Carlos Paradis, Fabio Palomba, Damian A Tamburri, Rick Kazman, and Kelly Blincoe. A preliminary study on the assign- ment of github issues to issue commenters and the relationship with social smells. InProceedings of the 15th International Conference on Cooperative and Human Aspects of Software Engineering, pages 61–65, 2022

    work page 2022

  45. [45]

    Modernizing sports an intelligent strategy for entertainment through internet of things in sports

    Rajesh Kedarnath Navandar, Syed Hamid Hasan, Netaji Jadhav, Kam- red Udham Singh, R Monisha, and N Venkatram. Modernizing sports an intelligent strategy for entertainment through internet of things in sports. Entertainment Computing, 52:100804, 2025

    work page 2025

  46. [46]

    Github - nltk data, 2025

    nltk. Github - nltk data, 2025

    work page 2025

  47. [47]

    Interop- erability in internet of things: Taxonomies and open challenges.Mobile networks and applications, 24:796–809, 2019

    Mahda Noura, Mohammed Atiquzzaman, and Martin Gaedke. Interop- erability in internet of things: Taxonomies and open challenges.Mobile networks and applications, 24:796–809, 2019

    work page 2019

  48. [48]

    Interop- erability in internet of things: Taxonomies and open challenges.Mob

    Mahda Noura, Mohammed Atiquzzaman, and Martin Gaedke. Interop- erability in internet of things: Taxonomies and open challenges.Mob. Netw. Appl., 24(3):796–809, June 2019

    work page 2019

  49. [49]

    Internet of things (iot) — nccoe

    National Cybersecurity Center of Excellence. Internet of things (iot) — nccoe

    work page

  50. [50]

    En- abling echonet lite devices in the matter ecosystem: A bridge solution

    Van Cu Pham, Toan Nguyen-Mau, Marios Sioutis, and Yasuo Tan. En- abling echonet lite devices in the matter ecosystem: A bridge solution. In 2023 IEEE 12th Global Conference on Consumer Electronics (GCCE), pages 867–868. IEEE, 2023

    work page 2023

  51. [51]

    Standardization of cloud interfaces using the matter pro- tocol for interoperable smart homes

    Luca Pizzocolo, Mattia Cerutti, Sanders Batista Felix, and Mattia Brambilla. Standardization of cloud interfaces using the matter pro- tocol for interoperable smart homes. In2025 IEEE 22nd Consumer Communications & Networking Conference (CCNC), pages 1–6. IEEE, 2025

    work page 2025

  52. [52]

    Matter project flow — matter documentation

    Matter Project. Matter project flow — matter documentation

    work page

  53. [53]

    Contributing to matter (formerly project chip), 2025

    project chip. Contributing to matter (formerly project chip), 2025

    work page 2025

  54. [54]

    Visual analysis of github issues to gain insights.arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.20900, 2024

    Rifat Ara Proma and Paul Rosen. Visual analysis of github issues to gain insights.arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.20900, 2024

    work page arXiv 2024

  55. [55]

    Challenges of recruiting developers in multidisciplinary studies

    Irum Rauf, Tamara Lopez, Helen Sharp, and Marian Petre. Challenges of recruiting developers in multidisciplinary studies. 2022

    work page 2022

  56. [56]

    Open source software development challenges: a systematic literature review on github.Research Anthology on Usage and Development of Open Source Software, pages 33–62, 2021

    Abdulkadir Seker, Banu Diri, Halil Arslan, and Mehmet Fatih Amasyalı. Open source software development challenges: a systematic literature review on github.Research Anthology on Usage and Development of Open Source Software, pages 33–62, 2021

    work page 2021

  57. [57]

    Matter bridge, Dec 2024

    Nordic Semiconductor. Matter bridge, Dec 2024

    work page 2024

  58. [58]

    Investigating developers’ email discussions during decision-making in python language evolution

    Pankajeshwara Sharma, Bastin Tony Roy Savarimuthu, Nigel Stanger, Sherlock A Licorish, and Austen Rainer. Investigating developers’ email discussions during decision-making in python language evolution. In Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering, pages 286–291, 2017

    work page 2017

  59. [59]

    An empirical analysis of issue templates usage in large-scale projects on github.ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology, 33(5):1–28, 2024

    Emre S ¨ul¨un, Metehan Sac ¸akc ¸ı, and Eray T¨uz¨un. An empirical analysis of issue templates usage in large-scale projects on github.ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology, 33(5):1–28, 2024

    work page 2024

  60. [60]

    Let’s talk about it: evaluating contributions through discussion in github

    Jason Tsay, Laura Dabbish, and James Herbsleb. Let’s talk about it: evaluating contributions through discussion in github. InProceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGSOFT international symposium on foundations of software engineering, pages 144–154, 2014

    work page 2014

  61. [61]

    Hidden and lost control: on security design risks in iot user-facing matter controller

    Haoqiang Wang, Yiwei Fang, Yichen Liu, Ze Jin, Emma Delph, Xiao- jiang Du, Qixu Liu, and Luyi Xing. Hidden and lost control: on security design risks in iot user-facing matter controller. 2025

    work page 2025

  62. [62]

    End-users vs software practitioners: Recruitment challenges and strategies in software engi- neering research

    Wei Wang, Dulaji Hidellaarachchi, John Grundy, Hourieh Khalajzadeh, Humphrey O Obie, and Anuradha Madugalla. End-users vs software practitioners: Recruitment challenges and strategies in software engi- neering research. In2024 IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing (VL/HCC), pages 400–411. IEEE, 2024

    work page 2024

  63. [63]

    A comprehensive analysis of challenges and strategies for software release notes on github.Empirical Software Engineering, 29(5):104, 2024

    Jianyu Wu, Hao He, Kai Gao, Wenxin Xiao, Jingyue Li, and Minghui Zhou. A comprehensive analysis of challenges and strategies for software release notes on github.Empirical Software Engineering, 29(5):104, 2024

    work page 2024

  64. [64]

    What security questions do developers ask? a large-scale study of stack overflow posts.Journal of Computer Science and Technology, 31(5):910–924, 2016

    Xin-Li Yang, David Lo, Xin Xia, Zhi-Yuan Wan, and Jian-Ling Sun. What security questions do developers ask? a large-scale study of stack overflow posts.Journal of Computer Science and Technology, 31(5):910–924, 2016

    work page 2016

  65. [65]

    Connected smart home over matter protocol

    Wondimu Zegeye, Ahamed Jemal, and Kevin Kornegay. Connected smart home over matter protocol. In2023 IEEE International Con- ference on Consumer Electronics (ICCE), pages 1–7, 2023

    work page 2023

  66. [66]

    Comparing smart-home devices that use the matter protocol

    Wondimu Zegeye, Ravindra Mangar, Jingyu Qian, Vinton Morris, Mounib Khanafer, Kevin Kornegay, Timothy J Pierson, and David Kotz. Comparing smart-home devices that use the matter protocol. In 2025 IEEE 22nd Consumer Communications & Networking Conference (CCNC), pages 1–6. IEEE, 2025

    work page 2025

  67. [67]

    What problems are mlops practitioners talking about? a study of discussions in stack overflow forum and github projects.Information and Software Technology, page 107768, 2025

    Yang Zhang, Yiwen Wu, Tao Wang, Ding Bo, and Huaimin Wang. What problems are mlops practitioners talking about? a study of discussions in stack overflow forum and github projects.Information and Software Technology, page 107768, 2025

    work page 2025

  68. [68]

    Emoji promotes developer participation and issue resolution on github

    Yuhang Zhou, Xuan Lu, Ge Gao, Qiaozhu Mei, and Wei Ai. Emoji promotes developer participation and issue resolution on github. In Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media, volume 18, pages 1833–1846, 2024. VIII.APPENDIX A.Impact of Command Output Removal While logs and stack traces often contain concrete failure details, we ...

    work page 2024