In my experience RH is -very- forthcoming when it comes to client support.
SRPMS (source RPMs) include a -lot- of meta data; same goes for pre-built RPMs.As for recompilation being possible, it is simple. RedHat can extend both the repository format and their package manager. The repositories would store instructions on how packages are built and what the dependencies are. The package manager needs to understand those instructions to be able to build packages from them. At that point, they can simply tell the package manager to build packages and it will build them. They can then distribute them and others can recompile them as they see fit. If it is never used to improve performance, it would still make for a good hardware sanity test, because compilation will more than likely fail on bad hardware.
Nothing stops you from you from:
$ yumdownloader package (download source)
$ yum-builddep package (download and install the package dependencies)
$ rpmbuild package --target XXX (rebuild the package using client-defined configuration)
I'm not sure you ever used RHEL in large and/or mission critical deployments.Honestly, I don't see why people wish to deride a suggestion that would increase the number of organizations using RHEL for its intended purpose. From what I have been told by people with whom I have spoken, the current repository situation keeps organizations on Windows and remedying that situation would eliminate a major factor preventing migrations to RHEL. I think it is quite obvious that my wishlist is meant to cover things that make RHEL for large organizations and not the typical end-user. All of the things I listed are things that I think would be useful for large organizations. Even if one item could be beneficial to end-users, that doesn't render it useless for enterprise use.