BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Slinger Jansen

Slinger Jansen contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Software Engineering

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 17 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
4works
0followers
1topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

4 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

A Systematic Literature Review on Trust in the Software Ecosystem

We conduct a systematic literature review on the concept of trust in the worldwide software ecosystem. We acknowledge that trust is something between two actors in the software ecosystem, and we examine what role trust plays in the relationships between end-users and (1) software products, (2) package managers, (3) software producing organizations, and (4) software engineers. Two major findings emerged from the systematic literature review. To begin, we provide a definition of trust in the software ecosystem, including a theoretical framework that decomposes and signifies a theoretical understanding of trust. Second, we provide a list of trust factors that can be used to assemble an overview of software trust.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2021arXiv

TrustSECO: An Interview Survey into Software Trust

The software ecosystem is a trust-rich part of the world. Collaboratively, software engineers trust major hubs in the ecosystem, such as package managers, repository services, and programming language ecosystems. This trust, however, is often broken by vulnerabilities, ransomware, and abuse from malignant actors. But what is trust? In this paper we explore, through twelve in-depth interviews with software engineers, how they perceive trust in their daily work. From the interviews we conclude three things. First, software engineers make a distinction between an adoption factor and a trust factor when selecting a package. Secondly, while in literature mostly technical factors are considered as the main trust factors, the software engineers in this study conclude that organizational factors are more important. Finally, we find that different kinds of software engineers require different views on trust, and that it is impossible to create one unified perception of trust. Keywords: software ecosystem trust, empirical software engineering, TrustSECO, external software adoption, cross-sectional exploratory interview analysis, trust perception.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Capturing Software Architecture Knowledge for Pattern-Driven Design

Context: Software architecture is a knowledge-intensive field. One mechanism for storing architecture knowledge is the recognition and description of architectural patterns. Selecting architectural patterns is a challenging task for software architects, as knowledge about these patterns is scattered among a wide range of literature. Method: We report on a systematic literature review, with the aim of building a decision model for the architectural pattern selection problem. Moreover, twelve experienced practitioners at software-producing organizations evaluated the usability and usefulness of the extracted knowledge.\newline Results: An overview is provided of 29 patterns and their effects on 40 quality attributes. Furthermore, we report in which systems the 29 patterns are applied and in which combinations. The practitioners confirmed that architectural knowledge supports software architects with their decision-making process to select a set of patterns for a new problem. We investigate the potential trends among architects to select patterns. Conclusion: With the knowledge available, architects can more rapidly select and eliminate combinations of patterns to design solutions. Having this knowledge readily available supports software architects in making more efficient and effective design decisions that meet their quality concerns.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Identification of Practices and Capabilities in API Management: A Systematic Literature Review

Traditional organizations are increasingly becoming software producing organizations. This software is enabling them to integrate business processes between different departments and with other organizations through Application Programming Interfaces (APIs). The main task of managing APIs is to ensure that the APIs are easy to use by third parties, such as providing helpful documentation, monitoring API performance, and even monetizing API usage. The knowledge on API management is scattered across academic literature. In this document, we describe a Systematic Literature Review (SLR) that has the goal of collecting API Management practices and capabilities related to API Management, as well as proposing a comprehensive definition of the topic. In the scope of this work, a practice is defined as any practice that has the express goal to improve, encourage and manage the usage of APIs. Capabilities are defined as the ability to achieve a certain goal related to API Management, through the execution of two or more interrelated practices. We follow a standard method for SLRs in software engineering. We managed to collect 24 unique definitions for the topic, 114 practices and 39 capabilities.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access