Morte de Ecossistemas de Software: causas, fases, estratégias e métricas

• Ano de defesa: 2025
• Autor(a) principal: FELIPE DE SOUZA SOUPINSKI
• Orientador(a): Awdren de Lima Fontao
• Tipo de documento: Dissertação
• Tipo de acesso: Acesso aberto
• Idioma: por
• Instituição de defesa: Fundação Universidade Federal de Mato Grosso do Sul
• País: Brasil
• Palavras-chave em Português: ecossistemas de software; medição de software
• Link de acesso: https://repositorio.ufms.br/handle/123456789/12591

Software Ecosystems (SECO) depend on platforms that serve as environments for developers interaction. When the organization that owns the platform does not support the synergy between organizational goals and developers’ expectations, the SECO may die. The death results in the definitive suspension of vital activities, directly impacting developers, who lose part of the learning and experience gained. Projects that depend on the SECO platform may be discontinued. Ultimately, the responsible organization loses the resources invested in the development and maintenance of the software and communities. Thus, understanding the signs that may indicate a SECO death is important. In this master’s project proposal, we discuss existing knowledge of SECO death and outline a vision to complement research on the topic. Our long-term vision is to establish benchmarks regarding causes, phases, strategies and metrics around SECO death. Based on a multivocal literature mapping (18 academic studies and 19 industry documents), five main categories of death causes were identified: technological aging, social factors, organizational failures, competitive pressures and financial unsustainability. The death process follows four distinct phases: initial aging, manifest decline, morbid/critical phase and terminal phase. Methodological triangulation resulted in a catalog of 47 metric groups organized in social, technical and business dimensions. Empirical validation with 24 experts established prioritization hierarchy: Human Capital (31.0%), Sustainability (26.6%), Competitiveness (24.4%) and Technical Foundation (20.6%). Social metrics predominated (61.38% of selections), with "Contributors and Active Developers"emerging as universal priority metric (28.79% of selections). The research revealed consensus on fundamental metrics and contextual specialization patterns, where different organizational challenges generate specific demands for metric categories, establishing empirically validated benchmarks for monitoring SECO vital signs.