A couple of points:

(a) ``Commercial'' is not one and the same as ``closed source''; you can
be either without the other.  I think rather than using _either_ of those
qualifiers, it would be better to think about it as ``not something
maintained by the NetBSD project''.  (And, to respond to another post: No,
refusing to endorse a product that hasn't been evaluated is _not_ treating
them as a pariah.  It's just refusing to give formal approval to something
that hasn't been evaluated---a reasonable thing to do, and which is
understood to be the case anyway.)

(b) No one guarantees NetBSD, either.  Saying that ``we'' (users? TNF?
Herb and any pet rocks he has? (^&) don't guarantee software W(*) because
W isn't open source somehow implies that ``we'' do guarantee some open
source.  This is a minor point, but the word ``endorse'' is probably a
better choice than ``guarantee''.  And, in fact, I don't think that
-announce should be seen to endorse _anything_---it's not a review or
advertisement forum; it's a place to announce things.


These, of course, are just the opinions of a happy NetBSD user; I don't
even represent a vote in the internal NetBSD structure.  Take it for what
it's worth.


(*)I don't say ``X'', for obvious reasons.  (^&


  ``I probably don't know what I'm talking about.'' --rauch@math.rice.edu