act vs Forgejo Runner
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted apps from related categories — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Not the right match-up?
act
Run GitHub Actions workflows locally for fast feedback
VS
Forgejo Runner
CI runner for Forgejo Actions
| Feature | act | Forgejo Runner |
|---|---|---|
| Category | CI/CD & Build | Git Hosting & Forges |
| License | MIT | MIT |
| Language | Go | Go |
| Setup difficulty | Easy | Medium |
| Min. RAM | 256 MB | 256 MB |
| Deployment | bare-metal, binary | docker, binary |
| GitHub stars | ★ 71,417 | ★ 300 |
| First released | 2019 | 2023 |
| Replaces | GitHub Actions | GitHub Actions |
Why pick each one
Choose Forgejo Runner if…
- Released under the MIT license
- First-class Docker support for quick deployment
- Written in Go
- Tiny footprint — runs in 256 MB RAM
Frequently asked questions
Is act or Forgejo Runner better?
act is the stronger all-round pick: it has both the larger community and the simpler easy setup. Consider Forgejo Runner if its specific feature set fits your needs better.
Are act and Forgejo Runner free and open-source?
Yes. act is licensed under MIT and Forgejo Runner under MIT. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run act and Forgejo Runner with Docker?
act: check the project docs for container support. Forgejo Runner: yes.