It seems disingenuous to count engineer hours at $200USD/hour for charitable donation-run projects. Is it charitable to funnel your donor money to CF? I'm sure CF is grateful for the donation..
Fact: Things break most often because of humans doing things - changes, like deployments and config modifications.
Set things up right to begin with, and in my experience you can leave them running for a long time without intervention.
> Is it charitable to funnel your donor money to CF? I'm sure CF is grateful for the donation..
Is the job getting done for the donors? I bet they don’t care about $300 if it means the website is highly available and the maintainer isn’t burned out from giving away $200/hr of opportunity cost all the time.
> Fact: Things break most often because of humans doing things - changes, like deployments and config modifications.
Totally agree, and sometimes success in your project forces your hand as you are pressed to add functionality or need to scale. If you can guarantee that you’re doing this work once, ignoring hardware failure or scaling, the scales may very well tip toward self-managed.
For a vast majority of projects, I think it just plainly makes sense to go this route, hence the success of these centralized hosts. It is the pragmatic option.
PS. For what it’s worth, I’m sorry you’re being downvoted simply for having an viewpoint that others disagree with.
I guess the question is what do you consider a long time?
RedHat usually break setups every 3-4 years which I personally consider way to frequent.
If I configure a server with automatic updates then I would like it to run with very little maintenance for at least a decade and a long time would be two plus decades.
Fact: Things break most often because of humans doing things - changes, like deployments and config modifications.
Set things up right to begin with, and in my experience you can leave them running for a long time without intervention.
Downvote all you like, but it's the truth.