  Code authorship is a key information in large-scale open source systems.
Among others, it allows maintainers to assess division of work and identify key
collaborators. Interestingly, open-source communities lack guidelines on how to
manage authorship. This could be mitigated by setting to build an empirical
body of knowledge on how authorship-related measures evolve in successful
open-source communities. Towards that direction, we perform a case study on the
Linux kernel. Our results show that: (a) only a small portion of developers (26
%) makes significant contributions to the code base; (b) the distribution of
the number of files per author is highly skewed --- a small group of top
authors (3 %) is responsible for hundreds of files, while most authors (75 %)
are responsible for at most 11 files; (c) most authors (62 %) have a specialist
profile; (d) authors with a high number of co-authorship connections tend to
collaborate with others with less connections.
