What a weird way to spend federal money. I say it's weird because NASA almost certainly has its own internal Linux support paid through overhead in one form or another, and again the incremental cost of adding "developer" support from Red hat is way, way cheaper than Rocky.<p>Finally, I doubt Rocky's support can perform as well as Red Hat's. No, I'm not talking about the people who talk on the phone when you break something. If you find a bug in a package, will Rocky be able to quickly and effectively upstream the fix, or will Rocky end up maintaining you on a custom patchlevel forever?<p>I doubt Rocky has the ability to truly fulfill 24/7 support. It's difficult to build a deep bench for support, and nearly impossible to make sure you're keeping up 24/7 capability for other Maintenance Engineering type tasks.<p>And if none of these reasons are important enough to stop you from paying them, maybe the thing you're doing isn't important enough to warrant paying for support anyway.