Conductor OSS vs Mercure

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?
FeatureConductor OSSMercure
CategoryAutomation & WorkflowsAutomation & Workflows
LicenseApache-2.0AGPL-3.0
LanguageJavaGo
Setup difficultyHardMedium
Min. RAM2,048 MB128 MB
Deploymentdocker, kubernetes, bare-metaldocker, binary
GitHub stars★ 32,066★ 5,297
First released20162019
ReplacesAWS Step Functions, CamundaPusher

Why pick each one

Choose Conductor OSS if…

  • Battle-tested at scale
  • Language-agnostic workers
Conductor OSS details

Choose Mercure if…

  • Released under the AGPL-3.0 license
  • First-class Docker support for quick deployment
  • Mature project with 5.3k GitHub stars
  • Written in Go
Mercure details

Frequently asked questions

Is Conductor OSS or Mercure better?

Neither is universally better. Conductor OSS has the larger community, while Mercure is simpler to set up (medium difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.

Are Conductor OSS and Mercure free and open-source?

Yes. Conductor OSS is licensed under Apache-2.0 and Mercure under AGPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.

Can I run Conductor OSS and Mercure with Docker?

Conductor OSS: yes. Mercure: yes.

Related comparisons