Conductor OSS vs Jobber
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted automation & workflows options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Not the right match-up?
Conductor OSS
Microservices and workflow orchestration engine
VS
Jobber
Smarter cron replacement with retries and notifications
| Feature | Conductor OSS | Jobber |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Automation & Workflows | Automation & Workflows |
| License | Apache-2.0 | MIT |
| Language | Java | Go |
| Setup difficulty | Hard | Easy |
| Min. RAM | 2,048 MB | 64 MB |
| Deployment | docker, kubernetes, bare-metal | binary, source |
| GitHub stars | ★ 32,066 | ★ 1,417 |
| First released | 2016 | 2015 |
| Replaces | AWS Step Functions, Camunda | cron |
Why pick each one
Choose Jobber if…
- Released under the MIT license
- Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
- Active community (1.4k GitHub stars)
- Written in Go
Frequently asked questions
Is Conductor OSS or Jobber better?
Neither is universally better. Conductor OSS has the larger community, while Jobber is simpler to set up (easy difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.
Are Conductor OSS and Jobber free and open-source?
Yes. Conductor OSS is licensed under Apache-2.0 and Jobber under MIT. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Conductor OSS and Jobber with Docker?
Conductor OSS: yes. Jobber: check the project docs for container support.