All the legit reasons mentioned in the blog post seem to apply to badly behaved client software. Using a good and stable server OS avoids most of the negatives.
Unattended Upgrades on Debian for example will by default only apply security updates. I see no reason why this would harm stability more than running a potentially unpatched system.
Even though minimal, the risk of security patches introducing new changes to your software is still there as we all have different ideas on how/what correct software updates should look like.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !selfhosted@lemmy.world
A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don’t control.
Rules:
Be civil: we’re here to support and learn from one another. Insults won’t be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.
No spam posting.
Posts have to be centered around self-hosting. There are other communities for discussing hardware or home computing. If it’s not obvious why your post topic revolves around selfhosting, please include details to make it clear.
Don’t duplicate the full text of your blog or github here. Just post the link for folks to click.
Submission headline should match the article title (don’t cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).
No trolling.
Resources:
selfh.st Newsletter and index of selfhosted software and apps
Why is unattended upgrades frowned upon? Seems like I good idea all round to me?
Mostly because stability is usually prioritized above all else on servers. There’s also a multitude of other legit reasons.
All the legit reasons mentioned in the blog post seem to apply to badly behaved client software. Using a good and stable server OS avoids most of the negatives.
Unattended Upgrades on Debian for example will by default only apply security updates. I see no reason why this would harm stability more than running a potentially unpatched system.
Even though minimal, the risk of security patches introducing new changes to your software is still there as we all have different ideas on how/what correct software updates should look like.
Fair, I’d just rather have a broken system than a compromised one.
Hell, debian is usually so stable I would just run dist-upgrade on my laptop every morning.
The difference there is that I’d be working with my laptop regularly and would notice problems more quickly