If you had the misfortune of reading the replies to my post, enjoy an explanation without corporate speak.

While the authors of this post need to walk a fine line to attempt to salvage their efforts, I have no stakes on this, and can tell you in black and white the answer to the last question is: yes, IBM and Red Hat are doing this to eliminate their competitors and extract more money from the market.

Time to pay rent:

https://almalinux.org/blog/impact-of-rhel-changes/

@maxsteenbergen @Migueldeicaza

Absolutely not. All Red Hat contributions are upstreamed where possible, and made available openly and without restriction at https://gitlab.com/redhat/centos-stream/rpms

That might not match precisely the form of the patch in an specific RHEL release, but those _are_ available alongside the binaries. Most differences are due — ironically contrary to the narrative Miguel is pushing — to getting those changes upstream, benefiting everyone and making patches obsolete.

@mattdm @maxsteenbergen people don’t want that, people want the exact replica, the one that is certified by assorted third parties for functionality and device drivers.

The bullshit you spew can work on some naive people, but sadly for you, i am not one of those.

@Migueldeicaza @maxsteenbergen

I agree that many people want those things. That work has value, separate from the code.

So, I get why people are so upset even though the licenses are followed (and beyond — again, it's not all GPL) and even though the actual fixes and improvements are shared freely to all.

But I wish you wouldn't keep claiming that Red Hat isn't doing the latter.