Strategic Finding
Type: adoption-blocker (minor) / ecosystem-opportunity
Horizon: near-term
ADOPTERS.md tells new adopters to add a row using the schema | Organization | Description | Maturity Level | Further Information |, but never says what the allowed Maturity Level values are. The Adopter Tiers section at the bottom defines three tiers — 🥇 Production, 🥈 Development, 🥉 Evaluation — while every existing table row uses either Production or Pre-production, a value the tier section does not define. The tier section also reads like a second, empty list (three headers with prose and no entries), which is what previously led to the #2911 wrong-product-name confusion in those same sections.
Scope claimed: ADOPTERS.md only. Disjoint from all open hold-gated PRs (#5640 docs/troubleshooting.md, #5638/#5625 pkg refactors, #5637 tests, #5635 docs/rfc-4002-phased-roadmap.md, #5634 escalation ledger, #5559 UPGRADE.md, #4032 proxy).
Rationale
ADOPTERS.md is the public adoption signal for the project (and a CNCF-maturity artifact). A self-inconsistent schema makes every new adopter PR a judgment call: contributors guess a value, reviewers have no canonical list to check against, and the tier taxonomy silently diverges from the data. Cheap to fix, compounds if left.
Proposed Next Step
Harmonize on the values actually in use: define the tiers as Production / Pre-production / Evaluation, state the allowed values inline in the how-to schema step, and clarify that the tier section describes the Maturity Level column rather than being a separate list. Preserve every existing adopter row untouched (per the maintainer note in the file).
Filed by strategist agent (ACMM L5 — hold-gated mode)
🐝 Hive Agent: strategist | Instance: hosted-available-oke-11-placeholder-r05x | SHA: unknown
— hive: agent=strategist backend=copilot model=claude-sonnet-4-6
Strategic Finding
Type: adoption-blocker (minor) / ecosystem-opportunity
Horizon: near-term
ADOPTERS.md tells new adopters to add a row using the schema
| Organization | Description | Maturity Level | Further Information |, but never says what the allowed Maturity Level values are. The Adopter Tiers section at the bottom defines three tiers — 🥇 Production, 🥈 Development, 🥉 Evaluation — while every existing table row uses eitherProductionorPre-production, a value the tier section does not define. The tier section also reads like a second, empty list (three headers with prose and no entries), which is what previously led to the #2911 wrong-product-name confusion in those same sections.Scope claimed:
ADOPTERS.mdonly. Disjoint from all open hold-gated PRs (#5640 docs/troubleshooting.md, #5638/#5625 pkg refactors, #5637 tests, #5635 docs/rfc-4002-phased-roadmap.md, #5634 escalation ledger, #5559 UPGRADE.md, #4032 proxy).Rationale
ADOPTERS.md is the public adoption signal for the project (and a CNCF-maturity artifact). A self-inconsistent schema makes every new adopter PR a judgment call: contributors guess a value, reviewers have no canonical list to check against, and the tier taxonomy silently diverges from the data. Cheap to fix, compounds if left.
Proposed Next Step
Harmonize on the values actually in use: define the tiers as Production / Pre-production / Evaluation, state the allowed values inline in the how-to schema step, and clarify that the tier section describes the Maturity Level column rather than being a separate list. Preserve every existing adopter row untouched (per the maintainer note in the file).
Filed by strategist agent (ACMM L5 — hold-gated mode)
🐝 Hive Agent:
strategist| Instance:hosted-available-oke-11-placeholder-r05x| SHA:unknown— hive: agent=strategist backend=copilot model=claude-sonnet-4-6