Introduction Earlier this year, the community was invited to share their thoughts on a potential new initiative called “Fedora Verified“. The goal of this survey was not to make final decisions, but to listen – to understand what contributors value, where opinions differ, and what questions still need answering.
This is a summary of what we found.
Note: Fedora Verified is still a conceptual idea under discussion by the Fedora Council. Nothing has been finalized. The Council plans to continue these conversations with the community in the coming months, including at Flock.
Who responded?
The survey received 90 fully completed responses from contributors across the Fedora community. We focused our analysis exclusively on these full responses to ensure we are looking at complete, thoughtful feedback.
What the community said
Key Takeaways – When we looked at the data, a few incredibly clear themes emerged regarding what contributors want this program to look like if it moves forward:
- Code isn’t everything: This was the loudest piece of feedback. A massive 66% of respondents explicitly stated that all types of contributions – including documentation, design, event organization, and community support – must carry the exact same weight as code contributions.
- Keep the door open for newcomers: Nearly 40% of respondents expressed concern that adding a “Verified” status might intimidate new contributors and make it harder for them to get started. Any future model needs a welcoming, clear on-ramp.
- 12 months is too short: We proposed that the Verified status would expire after 12 months of inactivity. A majority (52%) rejected this, feeling that life gets in the way and a 12-month expiry is too strict.
- Show us our progress: To help navigate the path to becoming Verified, 53% of respondents asked for a visual contribution tracking dashboard (similar to an enhanced Fedora Badges experience).
The Tension: Structure vs. Flexibility
The results also reveal two interesting and contrasting groups within the community regarding governance of the program.
A notable portion of contributors expressed a desire for more rigidity, wanting clearly defined milestones (43%) and formal committee reviews. At the same time, a similarly sizable group preferred less structure, with 62% asking for a moderately or lightly structured path, feeling that too much formality could discourage participation.
This tension was one of the most valuable findings of the survey. It shows that the Fedora Verified concept touches on something the community feels strongly about in different directions. Both perspectives are valid – setting clear expectations while leaving room for diverse contribution styles. The Council must achieve a careful balance as it moves forward.
What comes next?
These findings are being shared with the Fedora Council and relevant SIGs to inform future community conversations. The full analysis report, including a detailed breakdown of all survey responses, is available here: “Analysis Report.”
If you have thoughts or feedback on these findings, we’d love to hear from you on “Fedora Discussion.”