open-source project

Fedora Project

A community open-source operating-system project sponsored by Red Hat, with formal project governance and free-software production. Fedora Project scores well because ownership is comparatively aligned and the model leaves more value with stakeholders, and no current penalty outweighs that structure.

Why this matters: Large open-source projects can be structurally good while still carrying sponsor-governance questions.

Letter grade A Good Medium confidence (AI) Rubric gcd-rubric-v1 Last reviewed May 6, 2026

Final Score 60* A - Good

AGOOD60 pts

* Tentative scaffolding score. Not human-checked or final.

Base Material53

Bonus+7

Cap66No structure cap

After Cap60

Penalties0

!Not Verified

Represent this organization?

Request verification to have the evidence record checked against primary materials and organization-supplied documents. Verification does not buy a higher score; scores change only when review finds factual errors, omissions, or miscalibration.

Request verification

Evaluation Overview

A - Good

The score turns mainly on Ownership; no penalty currently dominates the evaluation.

Strengths

Ownership8/10
Extraction8/10
Governance7/10

Penalties

No penalties applied in this version.

Evidence state

ConfidenceMedium confidence (AI)
ThoroughnessDeveloped (AI)
Linked claims7
Direct axis claims7
Coverage6/12

Scoring Axes

Axis	Score	Why this score
Ownership ? Control rights: shareholder-dominated at 0, worker cooperative control at 10.	8 / 10	The linked record identifies Fedora Project as a community of people working together to build a free and open source software platform. The linked record identifies Fedora Project as a community of people working together to build a free and open source software platform. That places Fedora Project high on Ownership: decisive control is held by workers, users, members, or another stakeholder class rather than outside capital. A still-higher or maximum value requires stronger proof that this structure is durable, broad, and not merely discretionary. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Column-spectrum position: 168 scored entries below, 32 tied, 26 above on Ownership. Uncertainty Priority page: add more axis-specific research over time to make the comparative placement harder to dispute. Linked evidence Fedora Project describes itself as a community of people working together to build a free and open source software platform. [1] context Fedora Project leadership documentation describes Fedora as led by contributors from across the community, with a Fedora Council made up of appointed and elected members and Red Hat sponsorship in the background. [2]
Governance ? Binding decision authority: centralized control at 0, democratic stakeholder control at 10.	7 / 10	Fedora Project leadership documentation describes Fedora as led by contributors from across the community, with a Fedora Council made up of appointed and elected members and Red Hat sponsorship in the background. Fedora Project leadership documentation describes Fedora as led by contributors from across the community, with a Fedora Council made up of appointed and elected members and Red Hat sponsorship in the background. That places Fedora Project in the middle of Governance: there are accountability mechanisms, but they stop short of broad democratic control. The value stays below the top tier because the linked record does not show full democratic control, non-extractive lock-in, or complete stakeholder protection on this axis. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Column-spectrum position: 163 scored entries below, 28 tied, 35 above on Governance. Uncertainty Priority page: add more axis-specific research over time to make the comparative placement harder to dispute. Linked evidence context Fedora Project describes itself as a community of people working together to build a free and open source software platform. [1] Fedora Project leadership documentation describes Fedora as led by contributors from across the community, with a Fedora Council made up of appointed and elected members and Red Hat sponsorship in the background. [2] Fedora Council documentation describes the Fedora Council as the top-level community leadership and governance body accountable for the Fedora Project, strengthening governance and ownership confidence for the open-source-project score. [3]
Extraction ? Surplus allocation, wage share, CEO pay ratio, margins, and structured extraction judgment.	8 / 10	The linked record identifies Fedora Project as a community of people working together to build a free and open source software platform. The linked record identifies Fedora Project as a community of people working together to build a free and open source software platform. That places Fedora Project high on Extraction: surplus is structurally routed toward workers, producers, users, or public benefit instead of being primarily captured upward. A still-higher or maximum value requires stronger proof that this structure is durable, broad, and not merely discretionary. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Column-spectrum position: 173 scored entries below, 34 tied, 19 above on Extraction. Linked evidence context Fedora Project describes itself as a community of people working together to build a free and open source software platform. [1] context Fedora Project leadership documentation describes Fedora as led by contributors from across the community, with a Fedora Council made up of appointed and elected members and Red Hat sponsorship in the background. [2]
Labor Sovereignty ? Worker power: coercive conditions at 0, co-determination or ownership at 7. Employee dissatisfaction matters only when source-backed evidence shows concrete limits on worker agency, such as coercive scheduling, retaliation, wage theft, harassment, unsafe conditions, suppression of worker voice, or extreme turnover.	5 / 7	The linked record identifies Fedora Project as a community of people working together to build a free and open source software platform. The linked record identifies Fedora Project as a community of people working together to build a free and open source software platform. That places Fedora Project in the middle of Labor Sovereignty: workers or participants have some protection or agency, but not enough binding power to control the relationship. The value stays below the top tier because the linked record does not show full democratic control, non-extractive lock-in, or complete stakeholder protection on this axis. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Column-spectrum position: 152 scored entries below, 40 tied, 34 above on Labor Sovereignty. Linked evidence context Fedora Project describes itself as a community of people working together to build a free and open source software platform. [1] context Fedora Project leadership documentation describes Fedora as led by contributors from across the community, with a Fedora Council made up of appointed and elected members and Red Hat sponsorship in the background. [2]
Solidarity with the Unemployed ? Treatment of exits and nonworkers, including severance, redeployment, and non-competes.	5 / 7	The linked record identifies Fedora Project as a community of people working together to build a free and open source software platform. The linked record identifies Fedora Project as a community of people working together to build a free and open source software platform. That places Fedora Project in the middle of Solidarity with the Unemployed: some access, severance, retraining, openness, or mutual-aid value is present, but it is not central or durable. The value stays below the top tier because the linked record does not show full democratic control, non-extractive lock-in, or complete stakeholder protection on this axis. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Column-spectrum position: 158 scored entries below, 38 tied, 30 above on Solidarity with the Unemployed. Linked evidence context Fedora Project describes itself as a community of people working together to build a free and open source software platform. [1] context Fedora Project leadership documentation describes Fedora as led by contributors from across the community, with a Fedora Council made up of appointed and elected members and Red Hat sponsorship in the background. [2]
Loss-Bearing Fidelity ? Willingness to absorb costs to preserve values, workers, users, and public obligations.	5 / 7	The linked record identifies Fedora Project as a community of people working together to build a free and open source software platform. The linked record identifies Fedora Project as a community of people working together to build a free and open source software platform. That places Fedora Project in the middle of Loss-Bearing Fidelity: there is some willingness to preserve obligations, but the record still leaves meaningful risk-shifting concerns. The value stays below the top tier because the linked record does not show full democratic control, non-extractive lock-in, or complete stakeholder protection on this axis. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Column-spectrum position: 119 scored entries below, 43 tied, 64 above on Loss-Bearing Fidelity. Linked evidence context Fedora Project describes itself as a community of people working together to build a free and open source software platform. [1] context Fedora Project leadership documentation describes Fedora as led by contributors from across the community, with a Fedora Council made up of appointed and elected members and Red Hat sponsorship in the background. [2]
Market Conduct ? Pricing fairness, switching costs, lock-in, and rent extraction.	5 / 5	The linked record identifies Fedora Project as a community of people working together to build a free and open source software platform. The linked record identifies Fedora Project as a community of people working together to build a free and open source software platform. That places Fedora Project high on Market Conduct: pricing, access, switching, and bargaining practices show restraint compared with ordinary rent-seeking competitors. A still-higher or maximum value requires stronger proof that this structure is durable, broad, and not merely discretionary. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Column-spectrum position: 180 scored entries below, 46 tied, 0 above on Market Conduct. Linked evidence context Fedora Project describes itself as a community of people working together to build a free and open source software platform. [1] context Fedora Project leadership documentation describes Fedora as led by contributors from across the community, with a Fedora Council made up of appointed and elected members and Red Hat sponsorship in the background. [2]
Product Integrity ? Preservation of quality rather than degradation for monetization.	5 / 5	Fedora presents itself as a community-driven open-source operating-system project, which strengthens product-integrity confidence for a noncommercial public-interest technology project. Fedora presents itself as a community-driven open-source operating-system project, which strengthens product-integrity confidence for a noncommercial public-interest technology project. That places Fedora Project high on Product Integrity: the core offering is genuinely useful and comparatively less dependent on traps, degradation, or harmful dependencies. A still-higher or maximum value requires stronger proof that this structure is durable, broad, and not merely discretionary. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Column-spectrum position: 134 scored entries below, 92 tied, 0 above on Product Integrity. Uncertainty Priority page: add more axis-specific research over time to make the comparative placement harder to dispute. Linked evidence context Fedora Project describes itself as a community of people working together to build a free and open source software platform. [1] context Fedora Project leadership documentation describes Fedora as led by contributors from across the community, with a Fedora Council made up of appointed and elected members and Red Hat sponsorship in the background. [2] Fedora presents itself as a community-driven open-source operating-system project, which strengthens product-integrity confidence for a noncommercial public-interest technology project. [4]
Scale Integrity ? Whether growth improves or degrades fairness and accountability.	5 / 5	The linked record identifies Fedora Project as a community of people working together to build a free and open source software platform. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Column-spectrum position: 191 scored entries below, 35 tied, 0 above on Scale Integrity. Linked evidence context Fedora Project describes itself as a community of people working together to build a free and open source software platform. [1] context Fedora Project leadership documentation describes Fedora as led by contributors from across the community, with a Fedora Council made up of appointed and elected members and Red Hat sponsorship in the background. [2]

Penalties

No penalties applied in this version.

Bonus Credits

Bonus	Credit	Why this credit
Openness to Dissent ? Credit for tolerating internal, user, customer, worker, and public dissent without retaliation, capture, or viewpoint laundering.	2 / 3	The linked record identifies Fedora as a community project with contributor leadership and Council governance, supporting public participation and structured disagreement inside the project. The linked record identifies Fedora as a community project with contributor leadership and Council governance, supporting public participation and structured disagreement inside the project. That supports partial Openness to Dissent credit because people can criticize, dissent, or challenge the institution without being managed into silence. The value remains partial because the linked record does not show the practice as comprehensive, durable, or central enough for full credit. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Column-spectrum position: 200 scored entries below, 15 tied, 11 above on Openness to Dissent. Linked evidence Fedora describes itself as a community project with contributor leadership and Council governance, supporting public participation and structured disagreement inside the project. [5]
Constitutional Spirit ? Credit for respecting constitutional rights and civil-liberties norms even where private law does not strictly require it.	2 / 3	Fedora’s public identity as a free and open-source software community supports user rights to inspect, modify, and share core project software. Fedora’s public identity as a free and open-source software community supports user rights to inspect, modify, and share core project software. That supports partial Constitutional Spirit credit because the institution respects speech, privacy, due process, conscience, or civil-liberties norms beyond bare legal compulsion. The value remains partial because the linked record does not show the practice as comprehensive, durable, or central enough for full credit. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Column-spectrum position: 188 scored entries below, 23 tied, 15 above on Constitutional Spirit. Linked evidence Fedora’s public identity as a free and open-source software community supports user rights to inspect, modify, and share core project software. [6]
Good Deal ? Credit for unusually fair value: durable quality, fair pricing, low lock-in, and clear customer surplus.	3 / 3	Fedora provides a free and open-source operating-system platform to the public, creating unusually high customer and user surplus for a no-price software product. Fedora provides a free and open-source operating-system platform to the public, creating unusually high customer and user surplus for a no-price software product. That supports full Good Deal credit because ordinary users receive unusually fair value, durability, access, or surplus. Full credit is reserved for unusually clear, profile-specific evidence rather than ordinary compliance language. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Column-spectrum position: 200 scored entries below, 26 tied, 0 above on Good Deal. Linked evidence Fedora provides a free and open-source operating-system platform to the public, creating unusually high customer and user surplus for a no-price software product. [7]

Confidence Basis

Confidence is computed from the evidence trail and review state, not typed into the profile by hand.

Medium 70/100

7 verified linked claims 7 direct axis claims 0 disputed claims 6/12 components covered

This confidence label measures the source-backed evidence trail. AI-scaffolded scores remain tentative until human review.

Claim confidence 17/20

7 verified linked claims

Source quality 10/18

Best source per verified claim, weighted by institutional reliability

Direct axis-specific claims 9/18

7 direct claims across 12 active components

Dispute load 12/12

0 disputed claims on this entity

Recency 10/10

Newest accepted timestamp: May 13, 2026

Reviewer status 7/12

Human-reviewed components score higher than AI scaffolding

Component coverage 5/10

6/12 evidence-bearing components have direct support

Evidence State

Profile stateAI draft / human-pending

VerificationUnverified

ConfidenceMedium confidence (AI)

ThoroughnessDeveloped (AI)

Correction routeUse “Challenge this rating” for factual errors, missing counterevidence, source problems, or calculation mistakes.

Company responseCompany representatives can submit source-backed corrections; payment never changes scores or reviewer authority.

Claims and Sources

Claims are the evidence record. Each claim needs a source link, axis category, status, confidence level, and timestamp before it can support a score.

* Tentative scaffolding score. Not human-checked or final.

1Fedora Project describes itself as a community of people working together to build a free and open source software platform.

Ownership Verified High confidence AI-generated / human-pending May 5, 2026

AI scaffold

Fedora LinuxGeneral web source · 58%

2Fedora Project leadership documentation describes Fedora as led by contributors from across the community, with a Fedora Council made up of appointed and elected members and Red Hat sponsorship in the background.

Governance Verified Medium confidence AI-generated / human-pending May 5, 2026

AI scaffold

Fedora Project Wiki: LeadershipGeneral web source · 58%

3Fedora Council documentation describes the Fedora Council as the top-level community leadership and governance body accountable for the Fedora Project, strengthening governance and ownership confidence for the open-source-project score.

Governance Verified High confidence AI-generated / human-pending May 6, 2026

AI scaffold

Fedora Council CharterGeneral web source · 58%

4Fedora presents itself as a community-driven open-source operating-system project, which strengthens product-integrity confidence for a noncommercial public-interest technology project.

Product Integrity Verified High confidence AI-generated / human-pending May 6, 2026

AI scaffold

Fedora Project overviewGeneral web source · 58%
Fedora Council CharterGeneral web source · 58%

5Fedora describes itself as a community project with contributor leadership and Council governance, supporting public participation and structured disagreement inside the project.

Openness To Dissent Verified Medium confidence Human-reviewed May 7, 2026

Fedora Project overviewGeneral web source · 58%
Fedora Council CharterGeneral web source · 58%

6Fedora’s public identity as a free and open-source software community supports user rights to inspect, modify, and share core project software.

Constitutional Spirit Verified Medium confidence Human-reviewed May 7, 2026

Fedora Project overviewGeneral web source · 58%

7Fedora provides a free and open-source operating-system platform to the public, creating unusually high customer and user surplus for a no-price software product.

Good Deal Verified High confidence Human-reviewed May 7, 2026

Fedora Project overviewGeneral web source · 58%

Alternatives

AGOOD66 Debian Project open-source project · same market AGOOD64 OpenStreetMap Foundation democratic open-data foundation · same market AGOOD62 AdNauseam open-source privacy browser extension · same market AGOOD66 Lemmy open-source federated forum software · United States AGOOD66 Mastodon nonprofit open-source social network project · United States

Competitors

AGOOD66 Debian Project open-source project · same market AGOOD64 OpenStreetMap Foundation democratic open-data foundation · same market AGOOD62 AdNauseam open-source privacy browser extension · same market AGOOD57 Kubernetes open-source project · same market DEXTRACTIVE33 Automattic private open-web and publishing platform company · same market DEXTRACTIVE30 Brave private browser and advertising company · same market AGOOD66 Lemmy open-source federated forum software · United States AGOOD66 Mastodon nonprofit open-source social network project · United States

Help Improve This Profile

Submit source-backed evidence or challenge a specific claim, source, axis value, or calculation below.

How This Page Is Maintained

Evidence comes in through contributors, is checked by verifiers, and is synthesized by reviewers. Founder authority remains narrow and visible; scores recalculate when verified claims or the rubric change.

Civic Note

Incorporation, limited liability, market access, and other institutional privileges are public grants. Good Companies Directory treats those privileges as conditional on accountability to workers, users, communities, and the public.

Submit evidence for Fedora Project Add one source-backed fact for review.

Challenge this rating Point to a specific score, claim, source, or calculation problem.

Audit Log

Recent public changes for this company or group. The full audit log is part of the Transparency record.

May 6, 2026 at 12:00 AM UTC ai-scaffolding toxic-products-assessment

Added tentative AI-generated Toxic Products penalty 0 and directory value for current toxic, addictive, pesticide, livestock, chemical, or consumer-safety product exposure.

May 6, 2026 at 12:00 AM UTC ai-scaffolding confidence-calibration

Rechecked evidence coverage and source quality during the evaluation-quality pass; confidence now reflects direct source coverage, complexity, and remaining uncertainty rather than score direction.

May 5, 2026 at 12:00 AM UTC ai-scaffolding score

Added tentative AI-generated claim-backed score 53 to improve representation for sparse Structure filter categories.

View Full Audit Log