I've never understood this argument. Even if self-hosted things were offline more often (which I've never found to be the case, I've had Forgejo + runners running for a year now with no downtime), the real benefit is that you yourself can work to bring it back online when it does, rather than waiting on a large, slow-moving organization to figure out what slopped PR caused their global service serving ungodly amounts of RPS to go offline again.
replyI wrote my reply before yours appeared but it's basically agreeing. A simple Forgejo hasn't given me any grief. It really seems simpler.
replyMaybe they're hosting in us-east-1 though :)
lol
replyThen you would be exceptionally bad at selfhosting as Github has like one nine of uptime.
replyIt still has 2 9s according to the status page, but it is approaching Claude levels of downtime. :(
replyHard disagree.
replySelf-hosting a service like GitHub that operates at GitHub scale is difficult.
Self-hosting a service like GitHub that operates at the typical small/medium company's scale is trivial.
A single machine (with separate runners for CI) will cover many companies' needs. It being a single machine eliminates a lot of the complexity and failure modes associated with a distributed system and makes backups/restores/maintenance easy.
[dead]
reply