Self-Hosting is a similar tradeoff to running your own hardware, imo. You can increase control and overall cost effectiveness for additional scaling, but these

Self-Hosting is a similar tradeoff to running your own hardware, imo. You can increase control and overall cost effectiveness for additional scaling, but these choices have a certain base cost you can't reduce. Thus, they only work beyond a certain initial scale, or because you have some specialized requirements. For example, the source code as well as the tickets around a software tend to be the most critical assets of a company. As such, you need one or better 2 systems to host the source host and ticketing. However, such a system needs backups, so suddenly you need to maintain a backup solution, you need to implement and monitor the backups being created, you need restore tests. You end up needing some kind of monitoring as well. As well as 2-3 dudes at least part-time maintaining all of this capable of replacing each other during sickness and vacation. That's a lot of stuff as well as a lot of manpower as your base cost. Of course, once you have that, you can self-host a lot of things easily and maintain excellent uptime at minimal risk, because these base services scale very well in complexity. For us it makes sense to do this, because unplanned outages at 100+ developers are seriously expensive and risky. However, if you have 3 developers and a clock ticking to find product market fit, you don't have that budget - or spending it this way does not make sense. So you buy.