I'm afraid I may not have worded my original comment well. I was not making demands, I am thankful for the tools I have and use, I do demonstrate that by donati

I'm afraid I may not have worded my original comment well. I was not making demands, I am thankful for the tools I have and use, I do demonstrate that by donating to open source projects as much and as often as I can (but thank you for providing the link to encourage others), and I too as a software engineer contribute my time to such projects, for free, and without want nor need of thanks, but simply to know that my work is making a user's life easier somehow. It was not my intention to appear to be making demands, I was genuinely asking why deprecate the tool without a replacement. It seems there was a misunderstanding on my part, it is in fact the protocol being deprecated, contrary to how the majority of the article makes the point appear. As a software engineer, I too have users, and deprecating a simple, functional and easy to use tool is not something I would do without expecting a response, or for them to ask questions about how reasonable that is, whether they pay me or not. Expecting them to use a more inconvenient solution is something we should avoid as software engineers, and instead aim to make their life easier, whether they pay us or not. I have no issues with switching tools. I have embraced systemd, iproute2, ss and others. Deprecating scp as a tool/syntax, to me, seems more fundamental. I'd expect no less of a response than if we were to be told that "cp" itself was being deprecated in favour of something which may or may not offer a similar syntax, may require more thought to use and may or may not be available under certain conditions.