CIQ is rocky.

I was thinking one of the distros was backed by CIQ, but I couldn't remember which, thanks.

CIQ is a sponsor of Rocky (and my employer, to be transparent) - but they do not have a say over what Rocky does.

We (RESF/Rocky) are _not_ CIQ, and do not take direction from CIQ.

End of story.

I knew you'd show up and say this. CIQ's CEO claims to have founded Rocky and is the current president of RESF, is Rocky's most prominent sponsor, and Rocky's recent moves have been in the same direction that CIQ requires in order to survive. Regardless of direct control or not, Rocky's financial incentives align with CIQ's.

As you so point out your bias, it would be really nice if you didn't speak on behalf of your employer and let others make their own conclusions without hearing from those biased.

It'd also be nice if employees of Red Hat wouldn't make personal attacks on folks affiliated with Rocky Linux (and to a greater extent CIQ), justified or not, but I can understand nhanlon's defensiveness, just as I understand the defensiveness from many on Red Hat's payroll surrounding everything the past month+.

Where is the personal attack?

Elsewhere, mostly centered around Twitter, Reddit, and LinkedIn. Thankfully the comms have been more level-headed around these parts.

I can tell you that redhat has conducted a hostile license audit at my corporate data center.

This is one factor in my determination to never allow them into my regional data center. There are several other factors.

Not true. Rocky Linux is a Rocky Enterprise Software Foundation project. And on https://www.resf.org, you can see that RESF is backed by lots more folks than just CIQ.

Bryan Cantrill had an insightful talk "Corporate Open Source Anti-Patterns" surrounding events from 8-12 years ago, and all I'll say is history definitely echoes sometimes: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Pm8P4oCIY3g