Like most engineering choices it has upsides and downsides. I'm personally "pro choice" here and in favour of allowing system operators to decide how much and

Like most engineering choices it has upsides and downsides. I'm personally "pro choice" here and in favour of allowing system operators to decide how much and what kind of automation makes sense for them. TLS vulns in general are likely to need a server software or config upgrade in response, automated re-issuance is nice but doesn't significantly reduce overall toil. Revocation being "generally broken" sucks, but is not on my personal "top 50 security problems" that I care about. What very short lived certs do is create a tight runtime dependency between all deployed infrastructure working and JIT cert issuance systems & refresh code. IMHO this has analogous risks and benefits to JIT supply chains in real-world contexts. For some op models IMHO it IS better for a human to just put the thing on the server every year or two.