Forgejo vs Gitea
Both are free/open-source alternatives to GitHub. Here's how they stack up — verified facts, no spin.
Forgejo
TOP PICKCommunity-governed, copyleft self-hosted Git forge.
Forgejo is a lightweight, self-hosted Git forge stewarded by the non-profit Codeberg e.V. It is a soft fork of Gitea and stays close to it in features, offering repositories, pull requests, code review, issue tracking, a package registry, and GitHub-Actions-compatible CI via Forgejo Actions. Its draw is governance and durability: a non-profit steward plus a copyleft license aimed at keeping the software free for users over the long term. A good fit for teams that want a modern forge with independent, community-first governance.
Gitea
Popular, easy-to-run self-hosted Git service.
Gitea is a fast, lightweight Git forge written in Go and released under the permissive MIT license. It provides repository hosting, pull requests, code review, issue tracking, a package registry across many formats, and GitHub-Actions-compatible CI via Gitea Actions. It has the largest community and third-party ecosystem among the open forges and installs in minutes from a single binary or container. It is stewarded by the for-profit CommitGo, Inc., which also offers paid Gitea Enterprise and Gitea Cloud offerings alongside the open-source core.
Side by side
| Forgejo | Gitea | |
|---|---|---|
| Sovereignty Score | 99 | 98 |
| Open source | Yes | Yes |
| Self-hostable | Yes | Yes |
| Local-first | Yes | Yes |
| License | GPL-3.0-or-later | MIT |
| Pricing | Free / self-host | Free / self-host (optional paid Enterprise and Cloud tiers) |
Forgejo is Macrostack's recommended GitHub alternative, so it's our pick here.
Forgejo
Strengths
- +Non-profit governance (Codeberg e.V.) reduces the risk of future vendor capture
- +Copyleft GPL-3.0+ license (since v9.0) is designed to keep modified versions open
- +Lightweight — runs comfortably on a small VPS or a Raspberry Pi
- +GitHub-Actions-compatible CI via Forgejo Actions; supports OAuth, LDAP, and a package registry
Trade-offs
- −Younger project with a smaller community and third-party ecosystem than Gitea or GitHub
- −As a soft fork of Gitea, its independent identity and long-term divergence are still maturing
- −You own all operations: backups, upgrades, and security patching are your responsibility
- −GPL-3.0+ copyleft terms may not suit organizations that want a permissive license
Gitea
Strengths
- +Largest community and third-party ecosystem of the open forges
- +Permissive MIT license; simple single-binary or container install
- +Very light on resources — comfortable on modest hardware
- +GitHub-Actions-compatible CI, package registry, OAuth/LDAP, and a mature REST API
Trade-offs
- −Steered by a for-profit company (CommitGo) with paid Enterprise/Cloud tiers, a mild governance consideration versus a non-profit steward
- −Self-hosting means you handle backups, upgrades, and security yourself
- −Advanced enterprise features (e.g. SSO auto-scaling runners) are reserved for the paid Enterprise edition
- −Issue/PR and workflow data still need conversion when migrating between platforms
Facts verified 2026-07-07. Licenses and pricing change — spotted something out of date? That's a correction we want.