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: Vanilla OS Website – no official governance documentation available.

2. Decision Making Transparency: 0/3

• Documented decision-making process: Partial (0 points)
• Accessibility of meeting minutes: Not available (0 points)
• Source: GitHub Discussions – 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: Vanilla OS GitHub – repositories are public and well organized.

6. Public Roadmap Availability: 0/3

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

7. Transparency in Code Review Processes: 1/3

• Documentation of review processes: Partial (0 points)
• Transparency of review processes: Moderate (1 point)
• Note: Code review discussions occur in GitHub PRs.

8. Community Participation in Development: 1/4

• Number of active contributors: Low (0 points)
• Accessibility to development processes: Moderate (1 point)
• Source: GitHub – participation encouraged, but not fully documented.

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: 23.53/100

Concluding Analysis

Vanilla OS demonstrates varying levels of transparency and accessibility across the evaluated areas.

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

• Formal governance documentation and decision-making transparency.
• Economic transparency and accessibility of financial information.
• Development of a more comprehensive public roadmap.
• Structured and transparent code review processes.
• Increased community participation and documentation of development processes.
• Formal control and balance mechanisms in governance.

The score of 23.53/100 reflects Vanilla OS’s limited formal transparency structures. As a relatively new project, it is understandable that some governance and transparency mechanisms are still evolving.

Vanilla OS focuses heavily on technical innovation, such as its immutable root filesystem and custom package management. This emphasis, while valuable, may be currently prioritized over establishing formal open governance practices. Future transparency efforts could greatly enhance its standing in the open-source ecosystem.