root@ihack.net (Charles M. Hannum)  wrote:
 > seebs@plethora.net (Peter Seebach) writes:
 > > Maybe their current belief is that it would hurt them somehow.  The point
 > > is, it's nice for us to respect their judgement on it.  Otherwise, maybe
 > > people will be a bit less happy to use NetBSD - and the goal is to get them
 > > using it, no?
 > 
 > So it's `polite' for us to guess, based on total lack of information,
 > that they don't want this publicized?  Even though anyone with half a
 > brain could figure it out in 5 minutes and post an article on
 > slashdot?  I don't buy it.  What I buy is that they don't *care*
 > whether NetBSD is mentioned, so they just don't bother.  It's `our'
 > job to make them care.

So why doesn't someone talk to the NetBSD developer currently working for
a company that ships a product based on NetBSD and see why they don't
want it publicized.  Maybe they actually have a good reason.