[rorymalcolm]

Hosting any significantly scaled CI/CD system is very difficult work and since every team in your organisation usually touches it you often have a large blast radius. I've seen downtimes take a long time to recover from even when self hosted, compliance is also hard. It's a good candidate for SaaS IMO.

[tapoxi]

I've been the owner of our ~90 user GitLab deploy and its been mostly painless over the past two years, we have it installed on an autoscaling GKE cluster subscribed to the 'stable' channel. I helm upgrade it monthly.

[hotpotamus]

You have a strange way of saying "self-hosted" ;) But it sounds like you've found a happy medium. This is a subject I may need to look into the in relatively near future.

[capableweb]

As mentioned in a sibling comment: Yes, self-hosting comes with it's own problems, there are no silver-bullets in this industry.

However, I'd still argue that choosing when downtime can happen is important when you're pushing out larger changes to larger organizations. You don't want to be in the middle of a borked migration when your CI/CD service craps out and you can't rollback/push more updates or even restore backups as it was all automated via your CI/CD service.