@Jerry, I just saw this now … I’ve send you a PM about this a few minutes ago. Based on: Replicant support for FP2
For me it boils down to: Is the Fairphone project just a brand that wants to make the world better by marketing and by showing companies how small changes in the production chain are possible to make it “better” or is the Fairphone project also people getting their hands dirty everywhere and that includes the hardware, workers safety, chemicals, hazardous waste, recycling, new solutions and chip design these days. Else you cannot provide real support and the phone is just another standard technical gadget soon dead if it is not made to be “extendable” or just “better” by software. This is very complicated with the current standard SoC design and fast release cycles, I know.
But whatever chipset is used, in the end the FP project needs coders and these coders need to have access to more or less the full code. The more or less is important and we should talk about this. It not about the patented camera gimmicks, it’s about full support for a long time.
Please don’t use terms like “first world problems” it’s a stupid term for killing valid arguments like “hipster” and does not help.
I bought the FP1 and I knew it was crap technically, but knew it would be good enough for me for a long time AND because I wanted to support the FP idea. The FP2 is just “branding” a phone, again. That made me upset.
And please keep in mind the FP1 is not a very secure device if it doesn’t get more updates (browser!). That is a problem these days if you want to use your phone in a normal way. Therefore the chipset and having coders with access to (re)sources is important and this must be discussed.