Laminar vs Woodpecker CI
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted ci/cd & build options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Woodpecker CI
Simple, container-native continuous integration
| Feature | Laminar | Woodpecker CI |
|---|---|---|
| Deploy effort | Read-the-docs project | Under-an-hour setup |
| Health score | 77 · Good | 92 · Excellent |
| Category | CI/CD & Build | CI/CD & Build |
| License | GPL-3.0 | Apache-2.0 |
| Language | C++ | Go |
| Setup difficulty | Medium | Medium |
| Min. RAM | 128 MB | 256 MB |
| Deployment | bare-metal, source | docker, kubernetes |
| GitHub stars | ★ 354 | ★ 7,909 |
| First released | 2016 | 2019 |
| Replaces | Jenkins | Jenkins, CircleCI |
What are Laminar and Woodpecker CI?
Laminar
Laminar is a fast, lightweight CI service that runs build jobs defined as simple shell scripts. It avoids heavy configuration in favor of plain scripts and a minimal web dashboard.
- Scripts as build jobs
- Tiny resource footprint
- Real-time job output
- No web configuration needed
Woodpecker CI
Woodpecker CI is a simple, community fork of Drone offering container-native continuous integration pipelines. It targets developers who want lightweight CI alongside their Git server. It is deployed via Docker.
- Container-native pipelines
- Simple YAML configuration
- Integrates with Gitea and GitHub
- Lightweight footprint
Laminar vs Woodpecker CI: key differences
Laminar is written in C++, while Woodpecker CI is built with Go. Licensing differs — GPL-3.0 for Laminar versus Apache-2.0 for Woodpecker CI. Laminar is the lighter option, starting around 128 MB of RAM against 256 MB for Woodpecker CI. Laminar is the more established project (first released 2016), while Woodpecker CI arrived in 2019. Woodpecker CI has the considerably larger community, at 7,909 GitHub stars versus 354. Woodpecker CI lists first-class Docker deployment; Laminar does not.
Why pick each one
Choose Laminar if…
- Released under the GPL-3.0 license
- Written in C++
- Tiny footprint — runs in 128 MB RAM
Choose Woodpecker CI if…
- Easy to set up
- Lightweight CI
- Good Git integrations
Watch out for
- Fewer features than big CI tools
- Smaller plugin ecosystem
Frequently asked questions
Is Laminar or Woodpecker CI better?
Neither is universally better. Woodpecker CI has the larger community; both share a medium setup difficulty, so the decision comes down to features and licensing.
Are Laminar and Woodpecker CI free and open-source?
Yes. Laminar is licensed under GPL-3.0 and Woodpecker CI under Apache-2.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Laminar and Woodpecker CI with Docker?
Laminar: check the project docs for container support. Woodpecker CI: yes.
Which is lighter on resources, Laminar or Woodpecker CI?
Laminar has the smaller minimum footprint at 128 MB of RAM, compared to about 256 MB for Woodpecker CI. Real-world usage depends on library size, user count, and enabled features.