Rebranding the "CII Best Practices badge" to the OpenSSF

David A. Wheeler

All: Now that the CII Best Practices badge is part of the OpenSSF, it would make sense to discuss if it should eventually be rebranded to specifically note the OpenSSF, and if so, what its new names/URLs should be.

This issue proposes such a rebranding:

It proposes:
• Name: "CII Best Practices Badge" → "OpenSSF Best Practices Badge"
• Repo (GitHub) site:
• Website: (the goal is to have a much shorter URL; the long domain name has been a complaint in the past).
• Badge display (small image): “cii best practices” → “openssf best practices”

It is *important* that if a *naming* rebrand to the OpenSSF occurs at all, it must occur only *once*. It’s expensive in time & effort to do a rebrand, and it confuses many people. E.g., we’ll have to pay someone to update the logo, code changes will need to be made, and so on.

So let’s make sure that there’s very widespread discussion & general consensus about all changes *BEFORE* they occur. There is no *requirement* to rebrand; many projects keep old names because it’s easier to avoid rebranding. There’s also NO need to rush for a final decision; it’s MUCH better to delay to ensure that the decision won’t need to be revisited. My current expectation is that a rebrand will happen; my goal is to do it only *once*. I’d like the TAC & GB to approve the specific changes before any changes get made, to reduce the risk of needing to do it yet again.

The OpenSSF Best Practices WG is more than the CII Best Practices badge, but I’m hoping that “OpenSSF Best Practices Badge” will be sufficiently distinct from its other work that we don’t need to have more complex names. But that’s the point of starting the discussion now - I want to make sure that there are no problems with whatever the new name will be.

Please post comments on issue #1515, but if you’d rather discuss it in the OpenSSF Best Practices mailing list that’s fine too.

--- David A. Wheeler