IJRET: International Journal of Research in Engineering and Technology eISSN: 2319-1163 | pISSN: 2321-7308 __________________________________________________________________________________________________ Volume: 03 Issue: 05 | May-2014, Available @ http://www.ijret.org 67 CONTINUITY OF DEVELOPER RANKING AND GROWTH CHANGE PREDICTION Anil Kumar M.Tech Scholar, Galgotias University, Greater Noida, UP, India Abstract Enormous amounts of raw content and information exist universally and large databases contain unordered, ungraded and unranked data. Ranking is most famous, ubiquitous and comprehensive techniques to build hierarchy of unordered group of items by calculating rank of every item based on one or several multiple attributes values. This technique allows analyzing and evaluating product performance with other products. Widespread usage of ranking technique represents relationship among several groups of well known items. In this analysis paper, We retrieve promising information from Git repository and demonstrate important fact of developers working individually or in a group and rank the developers based on core activities and contribution on several projects, bug resolving processes, source code commit and expertise in multiple languages by mining Git (a version control repository system). We discover key developers, influential software practitioner, projects and programming languages. We found developers grow over time in diverse areas. Our result shows developer ranking can assists project manager to take better quality decision to assign projects and gain help from expertise developer to support newly joined team members in the organization. Ranked developer can assists business to improve source code quality, timely delivery of projects, lower maintenance cost and better customer satisfaction. Keyword - software practitioners, ranking, developers, Language-Language, commits ----------------------------------------------------------------------***-------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. INTRODUCTION Ranking has important aspects to assists users to explore popular and high quality content over low graded, unclassified, unorganized and unordered content which guide to take better quality decisions. It allows us to remove impurities and incorrect content which could provide fashionable, manageable and interesting content. Ranking is measurement of each subject and objects attribute single- attributes and multiple- attributes. For example personal favorite movies disks and list of songs, magazines, newspaper and sport items etc. Several ranking technique exists globally but visualization, comparison, analysis and performance of this techniques has to be performed to get insight into it and its results. Software developers works on several projects, resolves bugs, commits and write program code in multiple programming languages in different team in their work life cycle. This paper uses term developer or author or software engineer, software practitioner interchangeably with developers. Discovering and Distinguishing dedicate, committed, experienced, popular and expertise developer for particular field in the software project is critical issue for senior managers in the big organization. Managers always have challenge for selecting expert members from large software team. If any problem occurs in specific component or source code in big projects, then expert developers of similar projects of same team or other team is assigned to resolve the bug to increase the efficiency of the work and improve coding standards. Identifying individual experts in large team of software projects is challenging task since large project is spread over continent. Individual expertise in several project activities and leadership behavior is also mandatory to help team with different mindset in large groups. Highest number of experts in the team results in lower risk and increase performance and productivity whereas software team with less experience will end with loss of cost, timely delivery and lower quality source code and decreased productivity. They can ask a list of related questions to all team member to select the key developer could be possible but if there could be a tool or some sort of method to indentify key developer would be a better option. The tool that we could produce is to rank developers based on functional areas, key work and activities, expertise on projects, project type, kind of programming languages worked on, efficiency in identify bug and resolving bug, motivation, commitment, personal and professional behavior, and characteristics of over all work and activities in past projects in overall career. Next section described related work. Section 3 discusses methodology. Section 4 is about result observation and analysis on particular project and programming language. Section 5 discusses about overall results and section 6 is about conclusion.