# Fedora's council forbids using AI as the sole or final arbiter on a contribution and puts the final accountability for accepting it on a person

Page: https://flyvolo.ai/en/changes/ev-20251024-experienced-software-engineer-7
Date: 2025-10-24 · Stage: Constraint
Can this record move a task judgement? yes
Occupation: https://flyvolo.ai/en/careers/experienced-software-engineer

## Scope

One large Linux distribution, binding on its contributors and reviewers. The policy, whose MUST and MUST NOT carry their standard specification meaning, says you must not use AI as the sole or final arbiter in making a substantive or subjective judgment on a contribution, and that the final accountability for accepting a contribution, even if implemented by an automated system, always rests with the human contributor who authorizes the action. It allows automated checks for objective technical validation. Version 1.0; the page's own line gives its last review as 24 October 2025.

## Source

- Fedora Project (Fedora Council) — AI-Assisted Contributions Policy, Version 1.0 (last review 2025-10-24) — https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/council/policy/ai-contribution-policy/ (primary source)

## What this means

In one major project the call to let a change in is written down as a person's call, with the person answerable for it, whatever automation carries it out.

## What it does not show yet

One open-source project's rule about accepting contributions; it says nothing about release decisions at companies or how often its reviewers use AI.

## How to verify it yourself

Open the Fedora Project's AI-Assisted Contributions Policy and find "the sole or final arbiter".


More: https://flyvolo.ai/llms.txt