4 ms·

The problem is that OpenBSD has had some pretty significant user-facing changes in only the past year. The past few releases have seen apache replaced with ngin

The problem is that OpenBSD has had some pretty significant user-facing changes in only the past year. The past few releases have seen apache replaced with nginx, and the next version is going to be getting rid of nginx for their own httpd. If you're just using the basic webserver, that's some pretty significant change right there. While they're advertising clean and simple, they can and do introduce potentials for heavy breakage in nearly every release.

dietrichepp 12y ago
Presumably that's just the default web server, and you can use the webserver of your choice as well?
JoachimSchipper 12y ago
The old code is one pkg_add away, though. Breaking binary compatibility is at least as likely to hurt you - and simply upgrading PostgreSQL without a dump-reload cycle can hurt plenty.
- Sanddancer 12y ago
  That still requires admin time to update the configuration and change management tools, QA time to run a regression test that will exercise all the potential failure paths, development time if you count on the ability to do configuration updates based on application state, etc. Updates that look small can still require considerable changes.
  - lstamour 12y ago
    If you're used to it, you can streamline these processes and automate as much as possible. Even if it's a change you can't easily test or automate, by making just the one change at a time you know what to blame if it breaks. :)
lomnakkus 12y ago
Maybe that's an indication that the configuration of the web server should be partitioned into "basic configuration" (which they can all support) and a few other categories (which are supported by a subset), i.e. the configuration itself should be "standardized". I realize that this is a nontrivial proposition, but if we're ever going to realize the dream of "interchangeable parts" we're going to have to learn to do this stuff.

dietrichepp 12y ago

Presumably that's just the default web server, and you can use the webserver of your choice as well?

JoachimSchipper 12y ago

The old code is one pkg_add away, though. Breaking binary compatibility is at least as likely to hurt you - and simply upgrading PostgreSQL without a dump-reload cycle can hurt plenty.

Sanddancer 12y ago
That still requires admin time to update the configuration and change management tools, QA time to run a regression test that will exercise all the potential failure paths, development time if you count on the ability to do configuration updates based on application state, etc. Updates that look small can still require considerable changes.
- lstamour 12y ago
  If you're used to it, you can streamline these processes and automate as much as possible. Even if it's a change you can't easily test or automate, by making just the one change at a time you know what to blame if it breaks. :)

lomnakkus 12y ago

Maybe that's an indication that the configuration of the web server should be partitioned into "basic configuration" (which they can all support) and a few other categories (which are supported by a subset), i.e. the configuration itself should be "standardized". I realize that this is a nontrivial proposition, but if we're ever going to realize the dream of "interchangeable parts" we're going to have to learn to do this stuff.