According to @zach
but:
Therefore it depends on our activity if this will be seriously considered. If only a handful of people joins, the chances are low, I'm afraid.
On the other hand, I have a pretty strong reason, why I think this is important for the reputation of the company too:
Many have criticized, that by shutting down Particle mesh, we were basically left alone: the proposed solutions, such as "Develop on OpenThread SDKs directly" or "Reprogram the Xenon with Circuit Python and Adafruit" means that we have to abandon Particle, the cloud, and roll out our standalone solutions. And currently, there is literally no built-in mesh functionality in the active product line (please correct me if I'm wrong).
I think it would look much better if Particle could say: yes, we abandoned THREAD for a multitude of reasons, but have an alternative mesh solution. Probably inferior compared to our dreams of "everything just works", but at least there is some degree of support.
And it's probably much easier and secure (means high quality can bee guaranteed) to provide certain mesh commands and leave all network management and firmware updating problems to the users. If I were Particle, I wouldn't totally exclude myself from the potential mesh "market" of the future.
I have to accept, that the company's focus is now on
But I think a gateway device for whatever local mesh is also in this target group.