Is your definition of "Red Hat's moat" just "things Red Hat has spent money on and made freely available to everyone"? How does that fit into any definition of

Is your definition of "Red Hat's moat" just "things Red Hat has spent money on and made freely available to everyone"? How does that fit into any definition of a "moat"? Who are the "main developers of Wayland"? It's a set of protocols that plenty of people contribute to; people paid by Red Hat to work on GNOME, people paid by Canonical go work on GNOME, unaffiliated people who work on GNOME, unaffiliated people who work on KDE, unaffiliated people who work on wlroots and sway, people paid by various companies to work on various graphics drivers, people paid by Valve to work on SteamOS, etc etc etc. It's a process driven by consensus among implementers, not a project "developed by Red Hat".