Paper detail

An Empirical Study On Correlation between Readme Content and Project Popularity

Readme in GitHub repositories serves as a preliminary source of information, and thus helps developers in understanding about the projects, for reuse or extension. Different types of contextual and structural content, which we refer to as categories of the content and features in the content respectively, are present in readme files, and could determine the extent of comprehension about project. Consequently, the structural and contextual aspects of the content could impact the project popularity. Studying the correlation between the content and project popularity could help in focusing on the aspects that could improve popularity, while designing the readme files. However, existing studies explore the categories of content and types of features in readme files, and do not explore their usefulness towards project popularity. Hence, we present an empirical study to understand correlation between readme file content and project popularity. We perform the study on 1950 readme files of public GitHub projects, spanning across ten programming languages, and observe that readme files in majority of the popular projects are well organised using lists and images, and comprise links to external sources. Also, repositories with readme files containing contribution guidelines and references were observed to be associated with higher popularity.

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.