Labeling issues with the skills required to complete them can help contributors to choose tasks in Open Source Software projects. However, manually labeling issues is time-consuming and error-prone, and current automated approaches are mostly limited to classifying issues as bugs/non-bugs. We investigate the feasibility and relevance of automatically labeling issues with what we call "API-domains," which are high-level categories of APIs. Therefore, we posit that the APIs used in the source code affected by an issue can be a proxy for the type of skills (e.g., DB, security, UI) needed to work on the issue. We ran a user study (n=74) to assess API-domain labels' relevancy to potential contributors, leveraged the issues' descriptions and the project history to build prediction models, and validated the predictions with contributors (n=20) of the projects. Our results show that (i) newcomers to the project consider API-domain labels useful in choosing tasks, (ii) labels can be predicted with a precision of 84% and a recall of 78.6% on average, (iii) the results of the predictions reached up to 71.3% in precision and 52.5% in recall when training with a project and testing in another (transfer learning), and (iv) project contributors consider most of the predictions helpful in identifying needed skills. These findings suggest our approach can be applied in practice to automatically label issues, assisting developers in finding tasks that better match their skills.

Many organizations develop software systems using open source software (OSS), which is risky due to the high possibility of losing support. Contributors are critical for the survival of OSS projects, but very few new contributors remain with OSS projects to become long-time contributors (LTCs). Identification of factors that contribute to become an LTC can help OSS project owners utilize limited resources to retain new contributors. In this paper, we investigate whether we can effectively predict new contributors to OSS repositories becoming long time contributors based on repository and contributor meta-data collected from GitHub. We construct a dataset containing 70,899 observations from 888 most popular repositories with 56,766 contributors.