...did you just skip to slide 8? Explaining that was the first 7 slides.

- They need a web-server in base.

- They demand security.

- He submitted a patch for nginx to embrace new secure methods.

- It was rejected.

- Because a base server is required in base, and they don't want to maintain a fork of nginx for base: "Introducing HTTPD".

See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9202522

"It wasn't invented here."

Possibly (dunno). But they refer to that on slide 7:

    -  We also introduced new safer APIs like reallocarray()
    -  I wrote a big diff for nginx to adopt reallocarray() other such techniques
    -  And it got rejected.

Is reallocarray() BSD-specific? That might explain it.

It's OpenBSD specific. But it's also just 10 lines of portable C that are permissively licensed and can be added to any project without problems. It's even in a separate source file for this very purpose [1]

[1] https://github.com/robertbachmann/openbsd-libc/blob/master/s...

I like that. I might even swipe it for my own projects.

That'd be true if it weren't for a bunch of external projects that OpenBSD uses or which are hosted as part of OBSD but weren't invented by the OpenBSD folks (tmux is one such example). It all boils down to priorities: if your priority is security, chances are there's very little code out there you can drop in and use.

Don't know why you are being downvoted, that is a huge amount of the motivation behind openbsds innovations.

you're both being downvoted because you're both completely wrong. it turns out permissively licensed, security-focused, and easy to maintain code bases aren't easy to find outside of OpenBSD. so sometimes they have to write their own.

say, a packet filter, for example...

did you even RTFA? They wanted to continue using nginx.

Exactly, they want to appropriate it and improve it in line with their philospohy. That isn't incompatible with my comment.

That would be forking, no?

They're not appropriating it. They're just creating another reverse proxy.