Don't boringSSL & libreSSL have pretty much feature-parity with openSSL besides legacy and deprecated ciphers/features since they are forks of openSSL?
LibreSSL - the devs have concluded that, so long as TLSv1.2 is used with secure ciphers, it is every bit as secure as TLSv1.3 - but they still include some ciphers that have been more successfully attacked.
The library itself has the kind of compatibility hooks, and zealous porters out there that you'll be surprised what works.
You know all those changes that happened between OpenSSL v1.0 and v1.1? Every project had to work hard to accomodate those changes - compiling that code for older versions still has to work, or companies freak out.
Add LibreSSL into the correct side of the header-files' if-statements. Usually its legacy, but we're recently having to consider different versions of LibreSSL.
When a single if-statement begins to span three lines for readability's sake, you know you're shoving LibreSSL into the seam between OpenSSL versions.
Libp11, the backend for Yubikeys was surprisingly simple to get running on a different SSL backend. Three additional if-statements in one header-file, and one extended out. Code compiles, works beautifully, even past LibreSSL's v2.8.3 that I was running at the time.
BoringSSL - while Im less intimately familiar with Google's offering? I thought they were the first to implement TLSv1.3 - years before anyone else was even considering it.
I have no experience porting anything to it. The only folks I know who do? Are Google Engineers, writing proprietary code. The API is explicitly flagged as unstable/quickly changing on their github mirror.
Google, like always, doesnt care about your needs.