Hey folks! 
Here is the summary of the May 6, 2026, Fedora Council meeting. As the central leadership body of the Fedora Project, the Fedora Council guides the overall strategic direction of the project. Today’s meeting focused on revising our interview questions, advancing the AI Developer Desktop Initiative, and shaping the new Fedora Innovation Lifecycle policy.
Topics discussed in this meeting:
- Updating the F44 Council Interview Questions
- Community Initiative Proposal: Fedora AI Developer Desktop Initiative
- Adopting the Fedora Innovation Lifecycle as Council Policy
- Request for a public summary of the provenpackager revocation discussion
Note: AI (Google Gemini) was used to summarize the HTML log of the public meeting. I reviewed and corrected the AI-generated output before posting.
Executive Summary
The Council began by addressing the upcoming F44 Council elections, specifically the interview questions for candidates (council/tickets#565). Recognizing that the current list is too long and feels outdated, Akashdeep Dhar (@t0xic0der) will create a shared document for Council members to collaboratively narrow the list down to three critical questions before taking a formal vote next meeting.
A major milestone was reached regarding the Fedora AI Developer Desktop Initiative (council/tickets#562). Gordon Messmer (@gordonmessmer) attended to provide an update on the ongoing work, which aims to provide a Fedora Atomic Desktop system with out-of-the-box support for accelerated AI/ML applications. The Council officially voted to approve the initiative with Jef Spaleta (@jspaleta) acting as the Executive Sponsor. This decision will be finalized following a lazy consensus period ending on Friday, May 8.
The Council also discussed adopting the Fedora Innovation Lifecycle as official policy (council/tickets#564). @jspaleta is actively drafting the formal policy proposal. A key point raised during the meeting was the need for clearer gating and prerequisites around infrastructure provisioning during the Review phase. The draft will be shared privately with the Council for early feedback before entering the public Policy Change Policy process.
Finally, the Council briefly touched on a sensitive request for a public summary and voting record regarding the provenpackager revocation discussion (council/tickets#563). Acknowledging the complexities involved—including Code of Conduct considerations and election transparency—the Council determined that the issue required a high-bandwidth discussion and opted to schedule a dedicated internal video call later this week to discuss it in depth.
Action Items
- @t0xic0der: Create a Google Doc with the Council interview questions and share with all Council members for edits
- @t0xic0der: Send a mail to council-private@lists.fp.o with the Google Docs link when ready, prompt Council members to weigh in and provide feedback
- @jflory7: Update Ticket #562 with the meeting discussion, change due date on issue to Friday, 8 May
- @jflory7: If no -1 votes by Friday, onboard Gordon Messmer as a new Fedora Council member next week
- @gordonmessmer, @jspaleta: Create a recurring 1:1 meeting to discuss Initiative progress as Executive Sponsor/Initiative Lead
- @jspaleta: Share the Sandbox policy draft with Council on council-private@lists.fp.o for a round of Council early feedback/editing before moving ahead to the public Policy Change Policy process.
- @jflory7: Schedule an internal Council video call to discuss this sensitive ticket in high bandwidth, relay outcomes of that discussion into the public ticket
- @jflory7:
Post meeting summary on Fedora Discussion - @jflory7: Update tickets with comments based on meeting discussion today
Detailed Meeting Log
Topic: Intros, welcomes, hellos
The meeting opened with standard greetings and roll call. @jflory7 noted that five tickets were triaged on the project board, plus a new ticket from @mwinters proposing a legal policy had just arrived, prompting the Council to move efficiently through the agenda.
Topic: Ticket: council/tickets#565 (F44 Council Interview Questions)
The Council discussed the slate of questions for F44 Council candidates. @jflory7 expressed that the current questions feel “super stale,” “abstract/outdated,” and there are simply too many of them. He highlighted FESCo’s successful approach of limiting their questionnaire to just three targeted questions.
@jspaleta suggested that the Council collaboratively vote on their top three preferred questions. @t0xic0der volunteered to move the existing questions into a shared Google Doc to facilitate asynchronous voting and discussion. The Council agreed to set a deadline for async feedback by May 19th, enabling a formal vote to finalize the questions during the subsequent meeting on May 20th.
Topic: Ticket: council/tickets#562 (Community Initiative Proposal: Fedora AI Developer Desktop Initiative)
@gordonmessmer joined the meeting to field questions regarding the AI Developer Desktop Initiative. The proposal aims to deliver a Fedora Atomic Desktop system equipped with out-of-the-box support for AI/ML applications. @churchyard asked if the Initiative might be renamed to avoid “jumping on the AI bandwagon,” noting concerns that it might hurt the project. @jspaleta responded that renaming it to just “ML” would be dishonest, as the industry uses the term “AI” and there isn’t a better encompassing term for local compute workloads.
@jflory7 advised @gordonmessmer to specifically address @jforbes’ feedback regarding the LTS kernel in the wiki proposal, though he noted the work should proceed regardless. @gordonmessmer confirmed that the backend work has already begun, including infrastructure to build and sign kernels/modules with an HSM, but securing official Initiative status provides necessary legitimacy.
Feeling that sufficient iteration and discussion had taken place, the Council moved to a vote. The proposal received a unanimous +6 from the attending members. Given the absence of some Council members, the decision will remain open for a short lazy consensus period before final ratification.
Topic: Ticket: council/tickets#564 (Adopt Fedora Innovation Lifecycle as Council Policy)
@jspaleta brought the Fedora Innovation Lifecycle draft to the Council for a pulse check before taking it to public discussion. The Council reviewed the Entry phase guidelines, which dictate time-limited trademark use during sandbox stages.
@jflory7 requested clarification on infrastructure provisioning during the Review phase, noting a lack of clear prerequisites or gating on how a sandbox project requests or receives Fedora Infrastructure resources. He suggested providing concrete examples for each phase to make the policy easier to digest. @jspaleta confirmed he is working on a formal policy proposal draft to replace the “straw draft,” which he plans to circulate privately to the Council for feedback before Red Hat Summit, after which the 2-week public Policy Change Policy process will begin.
Topic: Ticket: council/tickets#563 (public ticket with a summary of the provenpackager revocation discussion)
The Council pivoted to a request from @eseyman to publish a summary and the FESCo voting record of the provenpackager revocation incident. @jflory7 expressed unease, citing the Code of Conduct aspects of the incident and a hesitation to reopen old wounds, pointing instead to the ongoing Conflict of Interest Policy draft as the systemic solution moving forward.
@eseyman maintained that subsequent FESCo elections cannot be considered completely fair without knowing the voting records from that decision. @churchyard disagreed with disclosing people-related private votes after the fact, citing expectations of privacy at the time of the vote and potential retribution. Recognizing the complexity and sensitive nature of the topic, the Council concluded they could not resolve it in the remaining meeting time. @jflory7 took an action item to schedule a dedicated, high-bandwidth video call for the Council to discuss the request fully later this week. The outcome of the private discussion will be made public in the Council ticket.
Topic: Open floor
Having run over the allotted time, @jflory7 closed the floor and committed to updating the tracker tickets and posting the meeting summary before Red Hat Summit.