I've worked with a group using Flynn to host a score of internal apps. It required one full time developer to keep it running, and saved a bunch of time and effort for the people maintaining those apps - no need for devops, pretty much, as deployment boils down to a ten line bash script. So if that tradeoff works for you, you should consider using Flynn.
In this age of it being next to impossible to hire devops folk, the idea that you can have one of them servicing the devops requirements for a sizable fraction of developed applications is somewhat attractive.
I wouldn't put Flynn in place for external-facing and high-traffic applications at the present time based on the experience I've had with it, however. Not ready for that, I think. You have to have a fair tolerance for short outages.
In this age of it being next to impossible to hire devops folk, the idea that you can have one of them servicing the devops requirements for a sizable fraction of developed applications is somewhat attractive.
I wouldn't put Flynn in place for external-facing and high-traffic applications at the present time based on the experience I've had with it, however. Not ready for that, I think. You have to have a fair tolerance for short outages.