If you don't understand the process which actually benefits from CentOS (as-it-was), then your redefinition of the problem domain still does not resolve the actual problem.
If CentOS didn't deliver on its promises while under Red Hat ownership, that's on Red Hat. The problems still needs to be solved (thus, Alma and Rocky), and no amount of corporate shilling results in Red Hat's deception going unnoticed for what it is. It is abundantly clear that Red Hat, under IBM, has led an effort more to deceive and extract profit than to be an honest, good-faith actor in FOSS communities.
Clearly, you don't understand the processes for which CentOS (and, by extension, Alma & Rocky) is an appropriate solution. Redeclaring the problem domain does not solve the problem.
In effect, Red Hat, by refusing to acknowledge actual developer workflows and peoblems, are not actually solving a problem at all, but instead are making new ones.
Comments
If you don't understand the process which actually benefits from CentOS (as-it-was), then your redefinition of the problem domain still does not resolve the actual problem. If CentOS didn't deliver on its promises while under Red Hat ownership, that's on Red Hat. The problems still needs to be solved (thus, Alma and Rocky), and no amount of corporate shilling results in Red Hat's deception going unnoticed for what it is. It is abundantly clear that Red Hat, under IBM, has led an effort more to deceive and extract profit than to be an honest, good-faith actor in FOSS communities.
Clearly, you don't understand the processes for which CentOS (and, by extension, Alma & Rocky) is an appropriate solution. Redeclaring the problem domain does not solve the problem. In effect, Red Hat, by refusing to acknowledge actual developer workflows and peoblems, are not actually solving a problem at all, but instead are making new ones.