Concourse CI vs Woodpecker CI
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted ci/cd & build options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Not the right match-up?
Concourse CI
Pipeline-based continuous thing-doer
VS
Woodpecker CI
Simple, container-native continuous integration
| Feature | Concourse CI | Woodpecker CI |
|---|---|---|
| Category | CI/CD & Build | CI/CD & Build |
| License | Apache-2.0 | Apache-2.0 |
| Language | Go | Go |
| Setup difficulty | Hard | Medium |
| Min. RAM | 2,048 MB | 256 MB |
| Deployment | docker, kubernetes, helm | docker, kubernetes |
| GitHub stars | ★ 7,878 | ★ 7,650 |
| First released | 2014 | 2019 |
| Replaces | Jenkins, CircleCI | Jenkins, CircleCI |
Why pick each one
Frequently asked questions
Is Concourse CI or Woodpecker CI better?
Neither is universally better. Concourse CI has the larger community, while Woodpecker CI is simpler to set up (medium difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.
Are Concourse CI and Woodpecker CI free and open-source?
Yes. Concourse CI is licensed under Apache-2.0 and Woodpecker CI under Apache-2.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Concourse CI and Woodpecker CI with Docker?
Concourse CI: yes. Woodpecker CI: yes.