[babarock]

> You’re a primary maintainer or core team member of a public repo with 5,000+ GitHub stars or 1M+ monthly NPM downloads.

I've been an open source maintainer of one of the biggest open source projects in the world[1], and it wouldn't fill any of these requirements. Anybody else hates it that now "open source" is conflated with Github (a private company, itself not open source) popularity?

[1]: https://www.openstack.org/

[johnfn]

This seems pretty explicitly to fit your case:

> Don't quite fit the criteria If you maintain something the ecosystem quietly depends on, apply anyway and tell us about it.

[upmind]

Interesting that they didn't read a single sentence below their quoted one... Or they just wanted an excuse to hate on GitHub

[jayofdoom]

I had the same thought, as an OpenStack developer as well (TBH I don't remember if my username here identifies me or not). Yeah, we can apply as an exceptional case, but realistically us being excluded shows the criteria is very much directed towards "github style" open source.

[elefanten]

Maybe worth asking for anyway? They might just be setting metrics based on the most popular ways of measuring but if they care about the spirit of the offer it would make sense for them to be flexible with the letter of the requirements.

[LtWorf]

Eh in a talk I gave i showed how easy it is to buy github stars and fake downloads to become popular, so these things should not be used as indicators of popularity.

And yes I hate it. Some "scanners" flag all my projects as abandoned because I moved to codeberg.