Woodpecker CI vs Forgejo
Detailed comparison to help you choose the right tool for your needs
W
Woodpecker CI
Open-source CI/CD engine
4.3
Editorial RatingQuick Comparison
Rating
4.3
vs4.5
Starting Price
Free
vsFree
Pricing Model
free
vsfree
Feature
Woodpecker CI
Forgejo
Container-native pipelines
Multi-platform
Git forge integration
Plugin system
Matrix builds
Cron scheduling
Git hosting
Issue tracking
Pull requests
CI/CD Actions
Package registry
OAuth2/OIDC
Woodpecker CI Pros
- Completely free and open-source
- Simple YAML configuration
- Lightweight resource usage
- Good Git forge support
- Active community
- Easy Docker deployment
Woodpecker CI Cons
- Smaller ecosystem than GitHub Actions
- Fewer plugins than Jenkins
- Less documentation
- No hosted option
- Limited enterprise features
- Fewer integrations
Forgejo Pros
- Community-governed fork of Gitea
- GitHub Actions compatible CI
- Lightweight single binary
- Active development
- No corporate ownership
- Federation support coming
Forgejo Cons
- Smaller community than Gitea
- Fewer third-party integrations
- Documentation still maturing
- Some Gitea plugins may not be compatible
- Less name recognition