  A software project has "Hero Developers" when 80% of contributions are
delivered by 20% of the developers. Are such heroes a good idea? Are too many
heroes bad for software quality? Is it better to have more/less heroes for
different kinds of projects? To answer these questions, we studied 661 open
source projects from Public open source software (OSS) Github and 171 projects
from an Enterprise Github.
  We find that hero projects are very common. In fact, as projects grow in
size, nearly all project become hero projects. These findings motivated us to
look more closely at the effects of heroes on software development. Analysis
shows that the frequency to close issues and bugs are not significantly
affected by the presence of project type (Public or Enterprise). Similarly, the
time needed to resolve an issue/bug/enhancement is not affected by heroes or
project type. This is a surprising result since, before looking at the data, we
expected that increasing heroes on a project will slow down howfast that
project reacts to change. However, we do find a statistically significant
association between heroes, project types, and enhancement resolution rates.
Heroes do not affect enhancement resolution rates in Public projects. However,
in Enterprise projects, the more heroes increase the rate at which project
complete enhancements.
  In summary, our empirical results call for a revision of a long-held truism
in software engineering. Software heroes are far more common and valuable than
suggested by the literature, particularly for medium to large Enterprise
developments. Organizations should reflect on better ways to find and retain
more of these heroes
