That sounds unlikely. Have you been taken in by the name squatting of "centos stream" sounding like centos while being a totally different thing? That was basically the point of IBM choosing that name after extinguishing centos.
Centos was a de-branded redhat built by a community effort that behaved the same as RHEL, so you could use it to develop&test software for deployment on RHEL.
Centos stream is an unstable upstream that RHEL is partially derived from, run by IBM. It could have been "fedora", but that wouldn't have the same obfuscation properties. Presumably IBM don't really need two unstable upstream distributions and will drop one of them at some point.
There are a couple of new community redhat builds, none called centos.
It's not a "totally different thing". It's different, yes, but not that different.
The name "Community ENTerprise OS" is still perfectly accurate. The release model is a little different from CentOS and RHEL, but you still get LTS support comparable to every other LTS distro, you are still guaranteed no ABI changes, etc. RHEL is built from CentOS Stream, so nothing can go into CentOS Stream that wouldn't go into RHEL.
>RHEL is built from CentOS Stream, so nothing can go into CentOS Stream that wouldn't go into RHEL.
This isn't strictly true. The main problem with CentOS Stream is that embargoed security updates don't go into Stream until after they ship in RHEL. This means that if the developer responsible for the patch forgets to commit it to Stream, it can take weeks or even months until somebody at Red Hat notices and the patch goes out to Stream users. As one example, a couple months ago basic packages like httpd and php were 4 and 5 months behind RHEL, respectively.
Yeah, Stream is okay if you don't require bug-for-bug compatibility with RHEL and just want a familiar, relatively stable, rpm-based distro. I would say its role corresponds loosely to Debian testing, whereas Fedora is more like sid.
In reality, though, I've been advising clients to treat Stream as nothing more than a stopgap solution until they can migrate to something Debian-based. We've been burned once by the untimely EOL of CentOS 8, and the continuing drama just doesn't instill confidence in the future of any free-as-in-beer distro related to Red Hat.
Example of "no more centos" evidence: https://www.redhat.com/en/topics/linux/centos-linux-eol
Centos was a de-branded redhat built by a community effort that behaved the same as RHEL, so you could use it to develop&test software for deployment on RHEL.
Centos stream is an unstable upstream that RHEL is partially derived from, run by IBM. It could have been "fedora", but that wouldn't have the same obfuscation properties. Presumably IBM don't really need two unstable upstream distributions and will drop one of them at some point.
There are a couple of new community redhat builds, none called centos.