[flagged]

For me it actually is the language. While a little pushy at times I think the arguments for rewriting certain things in a safer language is well founded. If the apt tool chains is one of those places I'll leave for the Debian developers to determine, but for decompression tools I can see a benefit.

If Rust should be the language of choice, preferably not. The syntax is awful, the language is complicated and Rust programs seems to collect dependencies at the same rate as JavaScript. Where I might agree with you is that Rust seems to attract a certain type of people. They write absolutely brilliant software, but like the Rust compile, they are rather particular with what input they'll accept.

In the end I don't really care what apt is written in, I'm not the one writing the code. I just use the tool. It would be sad if some platforms are left behind, because the Rust developers don't care about them and not because they're no longer useful.

> While a little pushy at times I think the arguments for rewriting certain things in a safer language is well founded.

Yes. It is. Just write the code and show us that it is good.

Ironically, the people hating on it (and usually without any technical arguments) act way more cultish.

At least it looks that way to my not-rust-using self

Tell me you haven't used Rust without telling me you haven't used Rust.