Hi Alexis, Just wondering, if the CNCF landscape means nothing, why have it in the first place? Can you please explain further? Thank you, Shilla

Costa "Alexis Richardson you posted that "the site doesn't say 'applied for CNCF and was rejected'". Please explain the "rejected" part. When netdata was rejected? How?" After you presented to the

Hi all, I am the founder of Netdata. We have merged Dan's PR. Thank you Dan! David McKay you mention that the above are "unethical wording used intentionally to cause inferences towards being

Dan, thanks for handling this in a polite way. I’ve witnessed and heard about worse moves than this to promote projects and products. The cloud native space is pretty crowded and people are looking

It looks like the criteria to get added to the 'CNCF Landscape' page is outlined here. It looks like the entry for netdata was originally added in this commit. Did they ask to be added? I wonder if

Well, stars are a vanity or input metric. How about downloads, traffic, engagements. GitHub has some stats available … Cheers, Michael -- Developer Advocate @ AWS +353 86 0215164 Amazon

Yes, it requires 300 stars to get added, among other criteria. https://github.com/cncf/landscape#new-entries I'd welcome ideas for additional requirements. Relatedly, netdata merged my PR:

I wasn't clear - I was thinking about the criteria the CNCF has for adding projects to the landscape (where one of the criteria is some number of github stars, if I recall correctly). On 7 Jun 2019,

Liz, Isn't there a challenge that folks who may want to "game" will not use the new system as it does not show the "inflated" numbers that they currently use? Thanks, Dims-- Davanum Srinivas ::

Maybe we (or GitHub) could build some kind of “realstars” count which only counts stars from folks who have also done some number of other activities (raising PRs or issues, making comments, maybe

Perfect Dan, thanks. Best Regards, Shannon Williams Rancher Labs shannon@... +1 650-521-6902

Liz, A bit orthogonal to the thread... but since you asked ;) I find forks to be a far superior metric of a project's success at building a community, interest in the project, and maintaining a

My first instinct would be to contact them directly to get them to course correct immediately, and make a public statement warning against this practice to the community. They also owe the community

Would it be appropriate to respond in a more public manner? Maybe just an article that says "check out our updated landscape" maybe to mention the archival of projects etc.. as well. Just thinking out

Thank you Dan I must say I'm a bit sceptical about stars. I wish it were more like stack overflow or discuss, so that you have to earn the right to give them out. On 6 Jun 2019, 22:46 +0100, Dan

I created this PR: https://github.com/netdata/netdata/pull/6234 -- Dan Kohn <dan@...> Executive Director, Cloud Native Computing Foundation https://www.cncf.io +1-415-233-1000 https://www.dankohn.com

While I’m not a lawyer, I wonder if this violates the trademark rules. https://www.linuxfoundation.org/trademark-usage/ states: Just thinking out loud. -- Matt Farina mattfarina.com

The site doesn't say "applied for CNCF and was rejected". This is an example of "lying by omission". It is not OK.

+1 – feels like an inappropriate use of the logo. @Dan Kohn – anything we can do to stop that?

While not "technically" incorrect, I understand what Alexis is saying; it seems like unethical wording used intentionally to cause inferences towards being CNCF supported/approved/certified. IIRC,