I've been happy with Unraid. The few issues I've had were HD controller problems.

I went from OMV, to TrueNAS, to just mounting the drives directly on my Proxmox host, combining them with mergerfs, and then sharing them from a samba container they're bind-mounted to.

Unless you have some fairly complex storage needs I'd say go with a good hypervisor over a dedicated storage OS with a hypervisor tacked on.

I use freeipa and the only luck I've had with integrating that with storage was by rolling my own with rocky Linux.

Before that truenas worked well, OMV is good for Lower power machines that can't handle full phat zfs and needs ext4 based mediums.

I use OpenMediaVault with ZFS plugin. I find it good for my needs. I tried TrueNAS and didn’t like it. Never tried unraid because it costs money and I wanted bit rot protection.

My priorities are ease of installation and administration, as well as reliability.

How much of a priority is reliability? How many drives are you running, and how many of them are mirrored or hot spares? or are you running one of the striped RAID levels?

Hard drives are consumables and should be expected to fail. Data redundancy is a fundamental requirement for reliability. Probably everything else in the server is disposable/replaceable, but the data isn't.

TrueNAS makes management of mirrored drive pools easy, and frankly 1:1 mirroring is the most sane way to handle redundancy (vs. parity striping), and you should always have at least one hot spare in the pool as well. For instance, I have five 8TB drives in a TrueNAS server - two mirrored pairs, and the fifth is a hot spare. I have 40TB of drive space but only 16TB of storage, but when an active drive fails then TrueNAS will automatically bring the hot spare online and copy the data from the mirror of the failed drive onto it and alert me that a replacement drive is needed. This is easy to set up, and TrueNAS also automates SMART testing and will attempt to load balance read & write cycles based on drive age and performance.