Nobody gets forced to port kernel stuff to rust. Also the rust compiler takes a lot of burden from maintainers by the safety it enforces.
The whole conflict ist not a technical one, it is entirely human. Some long-term kernel developers don’t like people turning up and replacing the code they wrote. Instead of being proud that the concepts they built get to be elevated in a superior implementation, they throw tantrum and sabotage.
When you’re maintaining a product that is based on linux, you’re surely qualified to port that thing to your platform yourself.
Open source developers are thanklessly giving away their work for free already, and for the many things where there’s just a github page it is just a one man show run in spare time. Don’t demand them to give away even more of their time to cater for whatever distro you’re using, just because you are not willing to invest the time to learn how linux works and also not willing to give a way a few megabytes for the dependencies they’re developing against.
All the discussions about things like distrobox and flatpak where linux novices express their dissatisfaction due to increased disk space are laughable. In the linux universe sole users have no power in deciding what goes, they do not pay anything and at worst pollute the bug tracker. Developers are what make up the linux universe, and what appeals to them is what is going to happen. Flatpak is a much more pleasant experience to develop for than a gazillion distros, hence this is where it is going, end of story. As a user either be happy with wherever the linux rollercoaster goes, or - if you want to see change- step up and contribute.
I think you slipped in the discussion intendations somewhere, this branch of the discussion tree is about the implications of piping curl into bash vs. installing packages
By that logic you have to review the Zed source code as well. Either you trust Zed devs or you don’t - decide! If you suspect their install script does something fishy, they could do it just as well as part of the editor. If you run their editor you execute their code, if you run the install script you execute their code - it’s the same thing.
Aur is worse because there usually somebody else writes the PKGBUILD, and then you have to either decide whether to trust that person as well, or be confident enough for vetting their work yourself.
Security wise it doesn’t matter, you run the code they wrote in any case. So either trust them or don’t. Where it matters is making a mess on your computer and possibly leaving cruft behind when uninstalling. But packages are in the works, Arch even has it since before linux support was announced officially.
Could you name some then. I don’t really see any in the article.