act vs Tekton
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?
act
Run GitHub Actions workflows locally for fast feedback
VS
Tekton
Cloud-native CI/CD building blocks for Kubernetes
| Feature | act | Tekton |
|---|---|---|
| Category | CI/CD & Build | CI/CD & Build |
| License | MIT | Apache-2.0 |
| Language | Go | Go |
| Setup difficulty | Easy | Hard |
| Min. RAM | 256 MB | 1,024 MB |
| Deployment | bare-metal, binary | kubernetes, helm |
| GitHub stars | ★ 71,417 | ★ 9,030 |
| First released | 2019 | 2018 |
| Replaces | GitHub Actions | Jenkins, GitHub Actions |
Why pick each one
Choose Tekton if…
- Released under the Apache-2.0 license
- Kubernetes-ready with Helm charts available
- Mature project with 9k GitHub stars
- Written in Go
Frequently asked questions
Is act or Tekton better?
act is the stronger all-round pick: it has both the larger community and the simpler easy setup. Consider Tekton if its specific feature set fits your needs better.
Are act and Tekton free and open-source?
Yes. act is licensed under MIT and Tekton under Apache-2.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run act and Tekton with Docker?
act: check the project docs for container support. Tekton: check the project docs for container support.