Conductor OSS vs OliveTin

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 OSSOliveTin
CategoryAutomation & WorkflowsAutomation & Workflows
LicenseApache-2.0AGPL-3.0
LanguageJavaGo
Setup difficultyHardEasy
Min. RAM2,048 MB64 MB
Deploymentdocker, kubernetes, bare-metaldocker, binary
GitHub stars★ 32,066★ 3,742
First released20162020
ReplacesAWS Step Functions, CamundaRundeck

Why pick each one

Choose Conductor OSS if…

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

Choose OliveTin if…

  • Safe access to scripts
  • Easy to configure
OliveTin details

Frequently asked questions

Is Conductor OSS or OliveTin better?

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

Are Conductor OSS and OliveTin free and open-source?

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

Can I run Conductor OSS and OliveTin with Docker?

Conductor OSS: yes. OliveTin: yes.

Related comparisons