Re: What's the point?
RHEL has the paid support that big Enterprise customers probably want.
CentOS _was_ the alternative for "the little guy" who is willing to do most of that support work himself. But being 'ahead' of RHEL (like a 'testing' branch) makes it "less stable".
So, 'Rocky Linux' will take the (former) CentOS slot of "stable" vs CentOS now being "testing",
Think of the *kinds* of issues that Windows is currently having from the way ITS patches roll out.. often inadequately tested, from what I see. You don't want to be first in line unless you're prepared to deal with the consequences of a bad patch.
So the assumption is that once a patch goes out for RHEL, the Rocky Linux project will fold it into their code base as well, making it stable in that a patch that's rapidly re-patched will only show up after the re-patch. Or that's what I'm thinking. And CentOS patches would be a "heads up it's coming" for them to get it all ready, maybe deploy a bit faster.
If I had a choice between rapid-patch and stability, I would ALWAYS choose stability. INstability requires constant fiddling and I'd rather not spend tons of time doing things that, to me, appear more like "scampering" and "tail chasing".