</>macrostackBrowse all
Head-to-head · CI/CD & build automation

Woodpecker CI vs Forgejo / Gitea Actions

Both are alternatives to GitHub Actions. Here's how they stack up — verified facts, no spin.

Also searched as Forgejo / Gitea Actions vs Woodpecker CI — same comparison, one verdict.

93

Woodpecker CI

TOP PICK

A small, container-native CI server you can run on one box.

OPEN SOURCEApache-2.0SELF-HOSTLOCAL-FIRST

Woodpecker is a community fork of Drone that stayed Apache-2.0 after Drone's licence changed. Every pipeline step is a container, the config is a single YAML file, and the whole server is one Go binary plus an agent — it will run comfortably on hardware you would otherwise consider too small for CI. It plugs into GitHub, GitLab, Gitea, Forgejo and Bitbucket, so you can keep hosting code where it is and simply move the build minutes onto your own machine. Of everything here it is the least ceremony for the most control.

91

Forgejo / Gitea Actions

Actions-compatible CI inside a self-hosted forge.

OPEN SOURCEMIT (Gitea) / GPL-3.0 (Forgejo)SELF-HOSTLOCAL-FIRST

Forgejo and Gitea both ship a CI runner that speaks the GitHub Actions workflow format, so a large share of existing `.github/workflows` files run unchanged — including many marketplace actions, which are just repositories. That compatibility is the point: it is the only option here where migration can be a copy rather than a rewrite. The trade is that you are adopting a whole forge, not just a build system, so it suits teams already considering moving off GitHub entirely rather than teams that only want cheaper minutes.

Side by side

 Woodpecker CIForgejo / Gitea Actions
Sovereignty Score9391
Open sourceYesYes
Self-hostableYesYes
Local-firstYesYes
LicenseApache-2.0MIT (Gitea) / GPL-3.0 (Forgejo)
PricingFree and open source. You pay only for the machine it runs on.Free and open source; self-hosted on your own hardware.
The verdict

Woodpecker CI is Macrostack's recommended GitHub Actions alternative, so it's our pick here.

Woodpecker CI

Strengths

  • +Genuinely Apache-2.0 with no enterprise carve-out
  • +Container-per-step model — the pipeline is portable by construction
  • +Runs against GitHub, GitLab, Gitea, Forgejo and Bitbucket
  • +Light enough for a small VPS; no database cluster required

Trade-offs

  • Small ecosystem — no marketplace of ready-made actions
  • You own the runner: patching, disk space and caching are yours
  • No hosted option, so there is nobody to page at 3am
  • Windows and macOS builds need machines you supply

Forgejo / Gitea Actions

Strengths

  • +Workflow syntax is Actions-compatible — existing YAML often runs as-is
  • +Many GitHub marketplace actions work because they are just repos
  • +Comes with the git host, issues and packages in one binary
  • +Forgejo is GPL-3.0 and community-governed under Codeberg

Trade-offs

  • Adopting it sensibly means moving your repositories too
  • Compatibility is high but not total — GitHub-specific contexts break
  • Smaller runner ecosystem; scaling out is manual work
  • Two similar projects with a contentious shared history to understand
See all 4 GitHub Actions alternatives →

Related alternative guides

Facts verified 2026-07-30. Licenses and pricing change — spotted something out of date? That's a correction we want.

The Macrostack brief

New swaps, worth your inbox.

A short, occasional email when we add a high-intent alternative or ship a new head-to-head. No spam, no selling your address — unsubscribe in one click.