Distro Transparency Index (DTI)

Detailed Evaluation

1. Governance Transparency: 0/3

• Availability of governance documents: No (0 points)
• Detail of governance documents: Minimal (0 points)
• Source: SparkyLinux Website – no official governance documentation available.

2. Decision Making Transparency: 0/3

• Documented decision-making process: No (0 points)
• Accessibility of meeting minutes: Not available (0 points)
• Source: SparkyLinux Forum – no formal documentation found.

3. Economic Transparency: 0/4

• Publication of financial statements: Not published (0 points)
• Detail of financial statements: Minimal (0 points)

4. Economic Accessibility: 0/4

• Access to financial reports: Not available (0 points)
• Ease of access: Difficult (0 points)

5. Source Code Accessibility: 4/4

• Availability of source code: Public (2 points)
• Ease of access to source code: Easy (2 points)
• Source: SparkyLinux GitHub – repositories are public and accessible.

6. Public Roadmap Availability: 0/3

• Public roadmap: Partial (0 points)
• Detail of roadmap: Minimal (0 points)
• Source: SparkyLinux News – no formal long-term roadmap.

7. Transparency in Code Review Processes: 0/3

• Documentation of review processes: No (0 points)
• Transparency of review processes: Low (0 points)

8. Community Participation in Development: 1/4

• Number of active contributors: Low (0 points)
• Accessibility to development processes: Moderate (1 point)
• Source: SparkyLinux GitHub – some encouragement through forums, limited formal documentation.

9. Impact of Governance Structure on Transparency: 2/6

• Centralization of decision-making power: Highly centralized (0 points)
• Control and balance mechanisms: Weak (0 points)
• Influence of commercial entities: Minimal (2 points)

Final Score: 20.59/100

Concluding Analysis

SparkyLinux demonstrates limited transparency and accessibility across most of the evaluated areas.

• Excellent accessibility of source code.
• Minimal commercial influence on governance.
• Some level of community participation encouraged through forums.

• Formal governance documentation and transparency in decision-making processes.
• Economic transparency and accessibility of financial information.
• Development of a public roadmap and more structured code review processes.
• Increasing community participation and documenting development processes.
• Establishing formal control and balance mechanisms in governance.

The score of 20.59/100 reflects SparkyLinux's limited formal transparency structures. While it performs well in code accessibility and maintains a community-driven approach, significant improvements are needed across most evaluation criteria.

As a lightweight Debian-based distribution with multiple editions, SparkyLinux appears to prioritize functionality and usability. However, increasing transparency and formal governance could strengthen the project's position and long-term trust within the open-source community.