[3np]

> I may add that the decision was made among ourselves, without the input of any third parties or partners

Maybe this, right here, is actually a major part of the bigger problem and not exonerating like it seems to be intended

> The reasoning behind not including SPI on the PCB wasn’t motivated by any single project or outside source – it was based on the fact that for years SPI was largely unused on PINE64 devices.

So if they only talked amongst themselves, how could they have any idea of if the SPI was already being used or not?

> And yet, despite this, we agreed to include it on the PinePhone Pro because developers from multiple projects – postmarketOS being one of them – were adamant that it was an absolute necessity.

So yeah, sounds like if they had engaged earlier, a lot of unnecessary frustration and grief could have been completely avoided.

Unfortunately this post does not even hint at the more significant point in Martijns post, the one about the relationships between PINE64 and the community distributions.