Source code summaries are important for the comprehension and maintenance of programs. However, there are plenty of programs with missing, outdated, or mismatched summaries. Recently, deep learning techniques have been exploited to automatically generate summaries for given code snippets. To achieve a profound understanding of how far we are from solving this problem, in this paper, we conduct a systematic and in-depth analysis of five state-of-the-art neural source code summarization models on three widely used datasets. Our evaluation results suggest that: (1) The BLEU metric, which is widely used by existing work for evaluating the performance of the summarization models, has many variants. Ignoring the differences among the BLEU variants could affect the validity of the claimed results. Furthermore, we discover an important, previously unknown bug about BLEU calculation in a commonly-used software package. (2) Code pre-processing choices can have a large impact on the summarization performance, therefore they should not be ignored. (3) Some important characteristics of datasets (corpus size, data splitting method, and duplication ratio) have a significant impact on model evaluation. Based on the experimental results, we give some actionable guidelines on more systematic ways for evaluating code summarization and choosing the best method in different scenarios. We also suggest possible future research directions. We believe that our results can be of great help for practitioners and researchers in this interesting area.