I have been using open source operating systems for a long time. My first meeting with them were in 1997-1998, when I was introduced to Red Hat Linux. Back then, the system was already very advanced, with art and documentation, and the system was very stable. The only thing missing was the user friendliness (which today seems to have replaced the stability). After this, I was introduced to the BSD's by a room mate when I went to university. BSD seemed more primitive in some ways, but I was assured that it was simpler / cleaner than Linux. Also, the system was rock solid - stable as diamond.

Open source systems used to be all about stability. Today, this might still be the case at the core, but how these systems are packaged and distributed somehow ruins it, and the systems come out full of bugs. Seemingly, the bugs only grow in number, as developers seem more keen to develop features than to make the system more stable. It's like the developers aren't using the software themselves.

As a principle, I think a developer should use the software he or she is developing - if not, they are not really equipped to know how to make the program appealing. It is all about good craftsmanship - and not so much about taking advantage of the accessible software repositories (cvn/svn/git etc). Even though it might be trendy to be contributing to a project, mass subscribtions of developers could lead to bugs and unfinished features.

I hope we get back to the age of stable oss projects. Right now I feel I am jumping from distro to distro trying to find a place where progress haven't been replaced by regress and bloat inflation.