Rust was not a viable option when pyca/cryptography was first released. You should be more familiar with projects before you invent strange promises you feel they've made to you.

I made the argument knowing that, actually. And in my opinion, the promises are almost always implicit.

No, after re-reading your piece, I don't think you did.

A good start would have been acknowledging that flaw in your premise, anywhere in the piece.

It's an unsalvageable argument regardless; you have invented a promise nobody made to you, compelling strangers to manage a project in which you have no involvement to conduct their work in accordance with your wishes.

I don't know why I can't reply to your reply, so I'll post it here.

My argument is that Rust _still_ isn't ready for the Cryptography library because it's not portable enough.

And I am not a direct user of the Cryptography library. I am an indirect user on x86_64, so I am unaffected. They have kept their implicit promise to me.

The only people that can be pissed off by promises are paying customers.

So those paying to Cryptography developers, are the ones to be pissed off, IF their platforms aren't being considered.

Does that include the customers of https://fishinabarrel.github.io/, the company owned by one of the Cryptography developers?

Yes, assuming they are paying for it and are not able to use it on the use cases they are paying for.

Then again, they clearly mention on that page:

" Please put us out of business.

Stop writing C/C++.

Probably you should also sandbox your software. "