However, it is "exactly" that code, isnt it.. thats been my understanding.

It may incidentally be in some cases, but isn't guaranteed to be. Things don't flow back up from RHEL to CentOS stream. Someone else mentioned that they were not able to build RHEL packages from CentOS stream.

Do you have an example of this, since the project I work on definitely has its code synced to gitlab..

I believe that would be actuall evidence of gpl non compliance, not this dismisive current interpretation that people have.

I don't think that most people who commented have a subscription.

Pushing things back to CentOS stream is not a requirement of GPL. GPL's role ends once RHEL customers get the source. Do you mean evidence of CentOS stream not being enough ? The post talks about it. Rocky needs to collate sources from several places now to create 1:1 RHEL rebuilds.

> Do you mean evidence of CentOS stream not being enough ?

I think this is what I mean, yes.

The rhel trees are synced from the centos trees. If centos git trees couldnt build, rhel couldnt build. Afaics the only time this seems to be in conflict is for important and critical cve's , which are built on a rhel specific branch. After package release these branches are merged with centos, and the local rhel branches deleted and business continues as normal.

This is an attempt not to break embargo agreements with researchers who ask for it.

According to Red Hat it is. If you don't believe them you can get a Developer subscription to get a RHEL ISO to compare with a CentOS Stream ISO. I imagine a lot of people, myself included, would be interested in the analysis of that.

So you do that analysis. Two downstream distros of RHEL have said that they cannot continue to offer RHEL rebuilds/updates without substantial changes. That means that it is not possible to use CentOS stream to build RHEL packages. You are free to do all the analysis in the world.