niroze

Not well.

It is a terrible option when there are much better alternatives available.

My problem now is just available time. I have plenty of things I want to get done, it is just a time sink problem.

It is nice to have new projects in the world.

Personally, I just don't get what it solves that can't be solved with shells and programming languages pre-installed on every machine already. From a personal workstation/development box shell (I used GNU Emacs for dev/mail/usenet for over a decade), I can understand but for servers this may not be appropriate.

It is "cool" but I'd argue that most geeks don't even fully understand installed tools on their current machines, so this is "interesting" at best. It was someone's project to learn programming?

I may be being negative, but "meh".

It isn't a "fight" or a "Linux vs OpenBSD" thing. It is just how they approach development. One could argue if it is "good" or "bad", but what matters is knowing it exists.

Many projects have different approaches to development. Sure, many people work on bugs most of the time, but there are big decisions about where the limited resources are going to be spent on new features. Those are the ones that truly matter.

There are examples of amazing things people have just done on a whim, but that isn't truly a standard and much of those things are generally huge.

Indeed! Spoken by someone that seems to have experience maintaining many machines.

As secure as the machine is, its security slowly degrades the longer it is out-of-sync with updates (especially security ones) and/or admins administering the machines aren't good enough.

System administration isn't a set-it-and-forget-it type of thing.

Great opinion piece. I think this is mostly the opinion of anyone that really discovers OpenBSD and gets caught up in it. Security does matter, and the developers accept nothing less than what they want.

My main problem with OpenBSD development is that all development is decided solely by the developers and there doesn't seem to be much care for what others want.. which is fine, they're doing all the work for peanuts.

Sometimes you just have to do things that aren't well suited for OpenBSD (imagine updating and ensuring hundreds of OpenBSD machines are up-to-date, and running high performant threaded applications). Many things work, but that is all they do. Sure it may be much more secure than other unix or linux offerings, it may be all there is. Much of the ports are just "get this to compile and work". That isn't always good enough. Truly evaluate if it fits your needs. If there is something you want on the platform, it may be up to you to fix it.

--

Unrelated, I find it interesting that NetBSD isn't mentioned once in this entire thread.