That was my intention.

> The fact developers have been able to ship Godot games on console doesn’t help much [...]

Well, it demonstrates that it's entirely possible, either via DIY, hiring an in-house specialist or contracting to one of the companies who has already implemented the functionality.

> [...] unless those developers are willing to share whatever proprietary engine-to-console-SDK-interface code they wrote.

The third party porting companies are willing to "share" that code--for a fee. They could also do the same for free as long as they respect the terms of their contract with the console platform (which probably is along the lines of "don't disclose anything to people who don't also have a contact with the console platform").

A group of companies could even cooperate on this but we'd presumably not know the details.

> Unity and Unreal, in contrast, will happily license equivalent code to you.

Sure, but it's also neither free[0] nor Open Source, e.g.:

"Build and deploy to closed platforms such as Nintendo Switch™, PlayStation®, and Xbox®. An active Unity Pro subscription is required to access these build modules via developer platform forums."

The nuance of "it is not possible for Godot to support consoles as an open source project" is that "it is not possible for [the] Godot [Project] to support consoles as an open source project [but the Godot Engine can be used on consoles if you write the support code yourself or license it from someone]".

Despite detailed explanations (from the devs) of the nuances, too many people interpret the situation as "you can't deploy Godot-based games on consoles" rather than "you can deploy Godot-based games on consoles but you can't get the code to do so from the Godot Project itself because vendors won't let it".

But perhaps for some people this isn't a significant distinction.

[0] https://unity.com/products/unity-pro