Per Aaron’s and few other comments:

…
...
*Long Answer: *I agree that BOSH can be better, as can all software ;-). However, the certification process for offerings isn't about experimentation in the ecosystem. It's about consistency across the distributions. Requiring BOSH as the deployment method gives us two key things: (1) much more consistency for operators of the platform and (2) a consistent target (really a least common denominator) for ISV's packaging software for backing services. The value of consistency year over year doesn't diminish the value of experimentation outside of the certified distributions.
...

It worries me that we are strengthening the how, specific implementation, as a higher goal than what can be innovated and accomplished within the project.
The comment that this will make BOSH stagnant is worthy of concern. It also assumes that BOSH’s implementation needs to be raised in importance which somewhat removes it from needing to compete with alternatives. Competition is good for the project. Specifically, with alternative deployment options on the market that are both garnering good healthy attention and innovating at a rapid rate, elevating BOSH's specific implementation to this level seems limiting. Case in point, to think that a decision for a certification like this can stop innovations like what Stackato has just brought to market as a currently certified product exemplifies the issue. To put innovations like this at risk to strengthen operator consistency or to simplify how to evaluate talent seems unneeded.