I agree with what @dasgeek said and I’ll just add in my 2 cents.
Red Hat and Google are very different situations.
- Google took something out that was available for open source edition and locked it to proprietary.
- CentOS was and still is open source, they just changed the purpose of it because that is what RHEL needed it to be. Not only is CentOS still open source, so is RHEL. RHEL has always been open source in fact, that is the only reason CentOS could have even existed in the first place.
Red Hat decided they no longer wanted to provide a particular product as it was. I don’t see an issue with that. I do see an issue with how they handled it and the timing they did in regards to the order of the announcements. These are issues but Red Hat changing what CentOS is, isn’t an issue to me.
Did Red Hat turn CentOS closed source? nope. Did Red Hat stop providing binaries for CentOS? nope. Did Red Hat stop offering source for RHEL? nope.
Red Hat’s decision is quite different to what Google did because Google killed all chance of doing something. Red Hat just said, a rebuild is still possible but we won’t be providing one. I think that is reasonable.
They should have done this during RHEL 8 announcement rather than when they did or wait until RHEL/CentOS 9 and sure that would have made them have to deal with more work for longer but it wouldnt have created this massive backlash. I think there were many mistakes here but the overall change to CentOS, I don’t think that is a mistake.