this post was submitted on 14 Jul 2026
35 points (92.7% liked)

Selfhosted

60664 readers
661 users here now

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:

Detailed Rules Post

  1. Be civil.

  2. No spam.

  3. Posts are to be related to self-hosting.

  4. Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or readme if you're providing a link.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title.

  6. No trolling.

  7. Promotion posts require active participation, with an account that is at least 30 days old. F/LOSS without a paywall has exceptions, with requirements. See the rules link for details. Tags [CBH] or [AIP] are required, see the links in Rule 8 for details.

  8. AI-related discussions and AI-involved promotional posts have additional requirements for tagging, as noted in Rule 7 and the AI & Promotional Post Expanded Rules post, and find example disclosures here.

Resources:

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.zip/post/67880752

Hi, I want to self host a git service to display my work (electronics) for some recruiters. Which platform is the best? I've heard about Gitlab, Gitea and Forgejo. For me the fact that the platform doesn't run some background analytics and does not sell my data is very important.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] Mihies@programming.dev 12 points 17 hours ago (3 children)

I'd say Forgejo as it is the most simple of the three. If you want more complexity (like CI/CD), then one of the other two. You can checkout Forgejo at codeberg.org.

[โ€“] F04118F@feddit.nl 17 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago) (3 children)

Gitea is not fundamentally different than Forgejo, Forgejo is just a better fork of it. Better in terms of: more contributors, more users, dogfooding (Gitea is built on Github ๐Ÿคฆ).

But yes, GitLab is like the Mac of Git forges: everything is included, doing everything their own way, vendor lock, very expensive. There is a community edition but serious users will run into its limitations and it does not integrate neatly with external solutions.

Forgejo is IMO the Linux of Git forges: low on resources, expandable, hackable, stable.

[โ€“] Dirk@lemmy.ml 3 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

We should also keep in mind that Gitea was hostilely taken away from the community by a for-profit corporation that made Gitea open-core by hiding a way features behind a paywall in a cloud.

[โ€“] vegetaaaaaaa@lemmy.world 1 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago)

FUD

Gitea is still MIT licensed and the Enterprise tier features only cater to large org needs [1]. Why would I want to deal with nightmarish SAML config when OIDC does a better job

Forgejo was forked because the maintainers were butthurt they didn't have more say in the development roadmap and their large PRs didn't get reviewed and merged fast enough. Which is a valid reason to fork

[โ€“] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 1 points 11 hours ago

There is a community edition but serious users will run into its limitations

No true Scot, then?

I'm running gitlab implementations at a few sites. I've not seen or heard of any performance limiter with a self-managed community edition that removes a tool the others still provide.

and it does not integrate neatly with external solutions.

Again, this sounds FUDdy. Which 'external solutions' are you using that a git-push fails on? Some spaghetti of saas tendrils seems to be already a risk, but I can't think of any other external thing that it could mess up with.

[โ€“] mbirth@lemmy.ml -3 points 17 hours ago

Eh, there's not really a better/worse between Gitea and ForgeJo. Gitea is targeting business customers, ForgeJo is targeting the open source community.

[โ€“] myrmidex@belgae.social 10 points 17 hours ago (2 children)

CI/CD works fine for selfhosted forgejo, I set mine up with minimal hassle.

[โ€“] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 2 points 11 hours ago

Is the CI/CD still a faithful clone of github's worst-in-show setup? Because if I had a plan for ditching GL, the CI keeps forgejo from being a contender.

[โ€“] Mihies@programming.dev -1 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

Sure, but it's not part of Forgejo, is it?

[โ€“] tedvdb@feddit.nl 7 points 16 hours ago (1 children)
[โ€“] Mihies@programming.dev 2 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

I guess it depends on how you look at it - "It needs to be installed separately."

[โ€“] tedvdb@feddit.nl 3 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

You left out a part of the sentence;

Note that Forgejo does not run the jobs, it relies on the Forgejo Runner to do so. It needs to be installed separately.

And:

As of Forgejo v1.21, Actions is enabled by default.

So yeah. it depends on how you look at it. For me it means it's part of Forgejo.

[โ€“] Ghoelian@piefed.social 1 points 10 hours ago

Github actions also needs a separate runner, github just provides some free ones for you. You can self-host a github actions runner as well.

[โ€“] Gulliver@lemmy.zip 1 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

Thanks for you reply, I did not know what CI/CD mean so just checked it, it's not important for me because I want to display only finished project. Forgejo looks great and I just found it's available as a TrueNas app which is great for me.

[โ€“] Ghoelian@piefed.social 2 points 10 hours ago

I've been running forgejo (and forgejo-runner for workflows) on TrueNAS for a little while now, without any issues really.

The runner image is also available as a TrueNAS app, so if you ever do want CI/CD it's pretty simple to set up.