I would suggest that it means the following:
- MySQL indeed is stuffed without InnoDB
- MySQL has validated the Firebird architecture with their choice
- Firebird dev capacity is not materially affected:
. Jim was one of about 50 contributors
. FB15 and FB20 were developed without Jim
. FB3 and FB3+ are already well underway
- Due to its small user base, the NFS code base is largely unproven.
If you want FB architecture, use FB, not MySQL/NFS.
- MySQL will probably open source the NFS code base, giving the FB
community more ideas to work from (doing 'west side story' is not
stealing from 'romeo and juliette', just as NFS is not stealing
from InterBase, and MySQL is not stealing from mSQL)

According to Evans, MySQL and Firebird are neck-to-neck in developer
popularity.
http://news.zdnet.co.uk/software/applications/0,39020384,39185042,00.h
tm
This deal means that MySQL will be abandoning the InnoDB
technology during the next year. As a result, the Firebird
architecture will be the dominant technology in this space by far.

The interesting thing will be to see which front end (MySQL API or
Firebird API) will win in the long run. Both have a large ecosystem
of tools around them.