That's snitching, it's straightforward imo - if they were both involved in the crime and he was there during the commission of the crime, whether or not he was the main shooter. He's still pointing the finger when he states that other dude was the one who actually pulled the trigger, that's still providing evidence or witness testimony against the other defendant in order to assist the state in their evidentiary or fact finding process. Rondo was there at the scene, did nothing to prevent the crime and assisted the shooter in carrying out the crime. Copping out for a time reduction in order to reduce his culpability - "naming names"- that's telling. If he was just a regular citizen (non-affiliated) giving an account of his activity at the scene that had nothing to do with him, he's recounting the circumstances - that's a different issue. But since he's affiliated and was given directives to carry out and participate in the acts that took place; for him to verbally agree to shift the blame based on his account to reduce the sentence - I mean, it is what it is.
