# A response to Martijn's blog

DevFeed: [A response to Martijn's blog](<https://devfeed.tech/articles/a-response-to-martijn-s-blog-34868.md>)

Original publisher: [Read original article](<https://pine64.org/2022/08/18/a-response-to-martijns-blog/>)

Published: 2022-08-18T00:00:00Z

Content type: opinion

Language: en

Sources: [Community blog on PINE64](<https://devfeed.tech/sources/community-blog-on-pine64.md>)

Topics: [Pinephone-Pro](<https://devfeed.tech/topics/pinephone-pro.md>), [Mobile](<https://devfeed.tech/topics/mobile.md>), [Linux](<https://devfeed.tech/topics/linux.md>), [Development](<https://devfeed.tech/topics/development.md>)

Tags: [article](<https://devfeed.tech/tags/article.md>), [community](<https://devfeed.tech/tags/community.md>), [opinions](<https://devfeed.tech/tags/opinions.md>), [pine64](<https://devfeed.tech/tags/pine64.md>), [pinephone](<https://devfeed.tech/tags/pinephone.md>), [pinephone-pro](<https://devfeed.tech/tags/pinephone-pro.md>)

## AI overview

PINE64 responds to Martijn Braam's criticisms of its treatment of mobile Linux developers and explains why SPI was initially considered for removal from the PinePhone Pro. The company says developer input led it to include SPI despite concerns about past limited use, support problems, and increased cost and sourcing difficulty.

## Source excerpt

We rarely, if ever, make responses to blog posts or articles. In fact, there is only one instance that I can think of when we did so. So then, somewhat uncharacteristically, this is a response post to Martijn Braam's blog in which he explains why he left the PINE64 community. Let's get one thing out of the way first: Martijn has done a lot for mobile Linux and PINE64 - he is a valued contributor and a colleague with a good insight into how PINE64 and the Pine Store Ltd operate. I should add that his opinions are welcome just as they have always been. Finally, there is no denying that his leaving is a significant loss to the project and, on a private level, a sad state of affairs for us in the community. If it wasn't clear, we really like Martijn. But this isn't what this blog post is about. Instead, this is a response to the points and concerns Martijn raises. A short summary first: Martijn's blog entry alleges that following PinePhone community editions, and after settling on Manjaro with KDE's plasma mobile as the default OS, PINE64 and the Pine Store Ltd have sidelined developers from other mobile Linux projects. The argument is made that this has hurt development. The example given in the blog post supposes that the community team and Pine Store employees were firmly intent on removing SPI on the PinePhone Pro and coerced not to ship Tow-Boot. He concludes by saying that we no longer listen to the development community. But here is the thing, SPI has been included on the PinePhone Pro due to the input from developers and against our initial intent. The talks concerning SPI were tense, as Martijn mentions in the article, in part because we did approach them with a presumption that we'll inform developers of our plan to drop SPI. I may add that the decision was made among ourselves, without the input of any third parties or partners. The reasoning behind not including SPI on the PCB wasn't motivated by any single project or outside source - it was based on the fac