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.
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+.
Thanks! I did look around the site quite extensively. That page says
> this is specific to a homeserver implementation
which suggests that it's not documenting a Matrix protocol. Unless Matrix has no standardized client protocol? Are all clients going to be homeserver-specific?
Even so I'd hope there's some document that says "Matrix standardizes server-server communication, client-server communication is out of the scope of this standard and is left to individual implementations" or something like that.
