Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

SparkFun Officially Dropping AdaFruit due to CoC Violation

sparkfun.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 591 posts

Re: SparkFun Officially Dropping AdaFruit due to CoC Violation

#311

Post by jacquesm »

ptorrone wrote: post #184
jacquesm wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you replace the Teensy 4.x it would have to be something very close to the same pinout, foot print, cost and features otherwise it would just be a new product. Ideally you would find a way to source the Teensy directly bypassing Sparkfun.

sparkfun is the single source supplier (and now maker of the product).

Yes, obviously, but they don't make the chips, so can't you just source the exact same chip, make thing pin compatible and call it a day? Then you'd have a drop in replacement, any changes you make will cause disruption for people downstream.

https://www.nxp.com/part/MIMXRT1062DVL6A

Re: SparkFun Officially Dropping AdaFruit due to CoC Violation

#312

Post by aobdev »

bityard wrote: post #269
aobdev wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand selling the Teensy line is out of your control, but what does “support” mean exactly in this context? Will related materials stay on your site? I really hope this doesn’t lead to “boycott” of Teensy per se. I completely sympathize with tensions running high but please reconsider for the good of the community.

Documentation yes, but also Adafruit has very active support forums where customers can ask questions which get answered either by the community, or Adafruit employees, or both.

If that's what they're referring to, then my question is why does that need to end?

Re: SparkFun Officially Dropping AdaFruit due to CoC Violation

#313

Post by squigz »

skilning wrote: post #291
nikdoof wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly, if I received an email like this from the MD of a customer, I'd probably want to wash my hands of them as well https://gist.github.com/NPoole/df0ec196ac1db7e6eecfd2496b9b4...

Can't help but read that and think, "And Nick thinks this email chain makes HIM look like the reasonable person?"

What am I missing about Nick's behavior that is unreasonable?

Re: SparkFun Officially Dropping AdaFruit due to CoC Violation

#314

Post by crumpled »

burnte wrote: post #126
HWR_14 wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it means anything they haven't shipped by the end of the day is being cancelled as an order. So I'm guessing they have very little inventory in stock or adafruit is contractually required to buy it back.

"Existing inventory will be sold through while supplies last. Once inventory is exhausted, no additional units will be restocked. We have put the remaining stock on sale." https://blog.adafruit.com/2026/01/12/discontinuing-the-teens...

The question was about Adafruit products on Sparkfun. This answer is about Teensies on Adafruit.

Re: SparkFun Officially Dropping AdaFruit due to CoC Violation

#315

Post by jacquesm »

inferiorhuman wrote: post #233
ptorrone wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it will have benefits over the 4.x - we can always spin up a version with the iMX chipset (we have a metro board with the little sister chip, iMX RT1011 already in stock) - tbh if we did something with the iMX RT106x we'd probably start with a Metro (Arduino-shield compatible) or Feather board since that's a super-popular pinout. either way, more hardware is better and we don't want to just give people the same-old-s…

Mostly I'm just leery of software defined peripherals being at the mercy of whatever community springs up around them, nothing specific. In terms of a Metro then yeah, something to slot in where the Due was absolutely with high speed USB, 10/100 ethernet, CAN FD, and all that jazz that wouldn't work on a $10 board. A SAMV70 successor to the Due? NXP just seems antithetical to an open platform. Then again Arduino went…

All chip manufacturers are alike in this respect, unfortunately. That whole industry believes that they thrive on secrecy and that simply properly speccing their hardware would already be a massive competitive risk.

Re: SparkFun Officially Dropping AdaFruit due to CoC Violation

#316

Post by 15155 »

KaiserPro wrote: post #268
15155 wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're a weapon of "social justice" - 90% of CoC rules are common-sense stuff that doesn't have to be said, combined with one or two "progressive" ideas shoehorned in.

Mate, thats just rules. rules you don't agree with.

Often these "rules" extend to conduct far outside of the purview of a project - typically crossing into identity politics.

"If you espouse views I don't like on your personal Twitter, you can't contribute to this entirely unrelated software project."

Re: SparkFun Officially Dropping AdaFruit due to CoC Violation

#317

Post by lelanthran »

behringer wrote: post #58
lelanthran wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What would you have them publish instead? The statement that is published places blame, if not accusations of criminal behaviour, on their business partner. IOW, they already overshared with the intent of damaging the reputation of their business partner. In my mind, they are already behind; had they released the standard business line "Our relationship with $X has come to an end; we apologise for any inconvenience…

nobody wants corporate speak. They are saying they are cutting ties and it's not their fault. No harm in that if it's true.

> No harm in that if it's true.

Same as saying "Behringer is a convicted paedophile": no harm if it's true, right?

Re: SparkFun Officially Dropping AdaFruit due to CoC Violation

#318

Post by crumpled »

robotfelix wrote: post #116
b112 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I did check on archive.org, and the code of conduct is there on March 2025. So they didn't just add it in the last month or so, and then send this notice.

From the Code of Conduct: > Unacceptable behaviors include but are not limited to: offensive comments, insults, jokes or ridicule; gratuitous or off-topic sexual images or behavior in spaces where they are nor other unappropriately aggressive behaviors; threats of violence or deliberate intimidation; creating additional online accounts in order to harass another person or circumvent a ban; harassment of any form. I c…

The image would have to be topical, and the sexual nature would have to be necessary (not-gratuitous) for it to be compliant with that CoC.

I'd be surprised if such an image can exist in an electronics forum because those parameters are pretty narrow. I also don't interpret policy as disallowing any form of joke.

I'm not about to go hunting, but I think I would find a good number of good non-offensive jokes, and probably no instances of sexual imagery.

Re: SparkFun Officially Dropping AdaFruit due to CoC Violation

#319

Post by disqard »

I have always supported Adafruit -- Limor's principles shine through in the products, the website, the tutorials, and in the long-term track record of standing by their products. Even when I can source things from AliExpress, I often get them from Adafruit.

Speaking for myself, SparkFun has lost me as a customer.

Re: SparkFun Officially Dropping AdaFruit due to CoC Violation

#320

Post by xyzzyxy »

jacquesm wrote: post #79
allreduce wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it weird to jump to this from the scarce information we have. "Someone did a CoC violation" is just a way for an org to say "someone was an asshole to such an extent it was driving other people away or getting us into legal trouble", with the manner of assholery defined in the CoC. 9/10 times it is nothing sinister. Of course right now we just don't know what happened.

The one thing I know is that for threads such as this one it is best to ignore all of the stuff from accounts made just for the purpose of participating in the thread.

In this case, given the topic of this thread is targeted harassment in response to public social media criticism, I think it's understandable that some folks might like to participate anonymously to avoid becoming a future target.
Post reply on HN