Which open-source CI/CD tool fits your team
Jenkins suits teams that need a large plugin ecosystem and a controller with separate build agents, and it is the right starting point when your pipelines must reach many older tools. Woodpecker CI suits lean, container-native pipelines, especially if you already run Forgejo, Gitea or a Codeberg-style forge. GitLab CI suits teams that want CI tied to a full DevSecOps platform, with source hosting, security scanning and compliance features in one place. Jenkins is MIT licensed, Woodpecker is Apache-2.0 licensed, and GitLab is open core, so the paid tiers matter for GitLab in a way they do not for the other two. Forgejo Actions and Gitea Actions are the natural choice for teams already on those forges, since they keep CI close to the repository, though you should confirm workflow compatibility with the specific features your pipelines use.
Each tool wins under a specific condition. Choose Jenkins when you can staff a team to maintain the controller, plugins and agent images, because the Jenkins LTS line ships in fixed baselines and plugin changes need active review. Choose Woodpecker when a small team wants YAML pipelines where each step runs in a container image and can scale through agents on Docker, Kubernetes or the local machine. Choose GitLab CI when you accept a commercial tier for the features you need, such as advanced CI/CD or compliance, and when you are ready to follow GitLab's monthly release cadence and required upgrade stops. Before committing, list the forges, plugins and deployment targets your pipelines must reach, then check each one against the documentation for your chosen tool.
Plan for the upkeep as well as the licence. Jenkins needs ongoing plugin management and Java version planning, and its configuration lives in the controller home directory, so back it up deliberately. Woodpecker needs a database choice, with SQLite by default and PostgreSQL or MariaDB recommended for larger instances, plus agent capacity planning. GitLab needs a larger footprint and a plan for upgrade paths. Ask each vendor or your implementation partner for a written list of what runs on your side, what is one-time setup and what recurs each release cycle.
Which CI/CD tool fits which scenario
This table maps common starting points to the CI/CD tool most likely to fit, with the condition under which each fit holds. Read it by finding the row closest to your current forge, estate and network constraints, then check the condition before choosing.
| Scenario | Best fit | Reason and condition |
|---|---|---|
| Existing Jenkins estate with many plugins and custom pipelines | Jenkins | Keeps existing Jenkinsfiles and plugin investments. Holds if your team can keep up with LTS upgrades and plugin changes, such as the bundled-plugin removals in LTS 2.580.1. |
| Self-hosted Forgejo forge, lightweight CI wanted | Forgejo Actions | Built into Forgejo and designed to feel familiar to GitHub Actions users, but not compatible with GitHub Actions. Holds if you do not need a separate CI control plane; confirm runner and feature coverage against the Forgejo Actions documentation. |
| Self-hosted Gitea forge, lightweight CI wanted | Gitea Actions | Built into Gitea and suited to teams that want CI close to the forge. Confirm the feature set and runner model for your Gitea version before committing, since it differs from Forgejo Actions. |
| Forgejo or Gitea forge, but a separate CI engine is required | Woodpecker CI | Supports Forgejo and Gitea as forges and runs Apache-2.0 licensed. Holds if you accept a second system to operate, with its own server, agents and database. |
| GitLab-centered DevSecOps program with paid tiers | GitLab CI | Pipelines sit inside the GitLab platform with security and compliance features on higher tiers. Holds if you already run GitLab or plan to, and accept the Premium or Ultimate subscription and monthly upgrade cadence. |
| Air-gapped or offline network | Jenkins or GitLab CI | Both can be run in offline environments; GitLab documents offline and air-gapped guidance. Holds only after you confirm that all plugins, images and runner dependencies can be mirrored inside the network. |
| Kubernetes-first team wanting pods per build step | Woodpecker CI | Its Kubernetes backend runs each step in a standalone pod with a temporary volume claim for shared files. Holds if your cluster storage supports the ReadWriteMany access mode that the default claim uses. |
| Kubernetes-first team running GitLab at scale on VMs | GitLab CI with Cloud Native Hybrid layout | GitLab's reference architectures keep stateful services such as PostgreSQL and Redis outside Kubernetes. Holds if your platform team can run those stateful services on VMs or managed services. |
How each tool defines and runs a pipeline
Jenkins defines a pipeline as code in a Jenkinsfile committed to the project's source control repository, written in either Declarative or Scripted syntax made of stages and steps. Work is executed by a controller that should hand builds to dedicated build agents, because the Jenkins scaling guide recommends keeping the controller limited to HTTP requests and build environment management. Every configuration file, plugin and secret lives in $JENKINS_HOME on the controller, so that directory is the first thing to back up. For Kubernetes, the supplied Jenkins Kubernetes plugin and install guide are the starting points, and you should confirm with the plugin documentation how agent pods are provisioned, sized and cleaned up in your cluster before committing to that layout.
Woodpecker CI reads workflow definitions from either a single .woodpecker.yaml or several files in a .woodpecker/ directory, where files run as parallel workflows unless ordered with depends_on. Every step runs its commands inside a container image you name, which means the build environment is declared in the repository rather than on the server. The server parses the YAML, receives forge webhooks and serves the UI and API, while agents connect to it over gRPC and run the workflows. An optional autoscaler can create cloud VMs for pending builds. On Kubernetes, the Woodpecker backend runs each step in its own pod and creates a temporary persistent volume claim, 10G with ReadWriteMany by default, to share files between steps. Confirm that your storage class supports ReadWriteMany before you rely on the default.
GitLab CI defines pipelines in a .gitlab-ci.yml file at the root of a project, and jobs are executed by GitLab Runner, a separate process that you install and register against the GitLab instance. The supplied sources describe the Runner documentation as the reference for executor types, but they do not establish which executors are available or how each one behaves on Kubernetes, so confirm that list against the current GitLab Runner documentation for your version. Before choosing a Kubernetes executor, ask your GitLab team which runner registration method, cache and artifact storage, and privilege settings they expect to run, because those choices determine how much cluster access the Runner needs.
Capability across the options
This table compares Jenkins, Woodpecker CI and GitLab CI on license, pipeline definition, agents, Kubernetes, plugins, forge support, default database and offline guidance. Where a cell says to confirm, the supplied facts do not settle it, so check that point with the vendor before you shortlist. Forgejo Actions is built into Forgejo with separate runners, and Gitea Actions is the equivalent on Gitea, so teams on those forges should evaluate those options alongside this table.
| Capability | Jenkins | Woodpecker CI | GitLab CI |
|---|---|---|---|
| License | MIT License | Apache-2.0, with documentation under CC BY-SA 4.0 | Open core: MIT outside the ee/ directory, proprietary inside it |
| Pipeline definition | Jenkinsfile in source control, Declarative or Scripted syntax | YAML in .woodpecker.yaml or a .woodpecker/ directory | Pipeline config in the project repository; confirm syntax details with the vendor |
| Agent model | Controller plus dedicated build agents, with the controller kept for HTTP and management | Server plus agents connected over gRPC, with an optional autoscaler that creates cloud VMs | GitLab Runner agents; confirm executor and autoscaling options with the vendor |
| Kubernetes support | Kubernetes plugin and install guide; confirm the agent pod model with the vendor | Kubernetes backend runs each step in its own pod with a temporary shared volume claim | Runner documented; GitLab's reference architectures do not support running PostgreSQL or Redis inside Kubernetes |
| Plugin or integration ecosystem | More than 2,300 community plugins | Plugins are container images; Drone plugins generally work but may need changes | Built-in features by tier; Premium adds advanced CI/CD, Ultimate adds security scanning |
| Forge support | Confirm forge integrations with the vendor; not covered by the supplied facts | GitHub, Gitea, Forgejo, GitLab, Bitbucket and Bitbucket Datacenter; multiple forges per server is experimental | GitLab is the forge itself, so CI is tied to GitLab projects |
| Default database | File-based configuration in $JENKINS_HOME on the controller | SQLite by default; PostgreSQL or MariaDB recommended for larger instances | PostgreSQL bundled with the Linux package |
| Offline or air-gapped guidance | Confirm with the vendor; not covered by the supplied facts | Confirm with the vendor; not covered by the supplied facts | Offline and air-gapped guidance documented, including security scanners |
Each option in brief, with its license
Each card names one CI/CD option, its license and the condition under which its strengths matter. Licenses differ in more than name: some options are open core, and the Forgejo and Gitea actions only apply if you already run that forge.
Jenkins under the MIT License
Jenkins is distributed under the MIT License, so the core server is free to run and modify. It uses a controller that schedules work and build agents that execute it, and its ecosystem is large, with more than 2,300 community-contributed plugins. The strength matters most when you need many integrations and can staff plugin upkeep. Check which plugins your pipelines depend on, since the 2.580.1 LTS release stopped bundling several of them, including the SSH server and JUnit plugins, and they must now be installed through the plugin manager.
Woodpecker CI under Apache-2.0
Woodpecker CI is licensed under Apache-2.0, and it was forked from Drone 0.8 in 2019 after Drone's license changed to a proprietary one. It is the main CI/CD engine at Codeberg, which makes it a practical fit for teams already on Forgejo, Gitea or Codeberg-style forges. Pipelines are YAML files in your repository, and each step runs in a container image. Its strength matters most for container-native pipelines with a small operating footprint. Confirm which forge integrations you need, because connecting multiple forges to one server is still experimental.
GitLab CI in open core
GitLab CI ships inside GitLab, which is open core. Code outside the ee/ directory is MIT licensed, while files inside ee/ are proprietary and need a paid subscription, so this is not fully OSI open source. The CI features you use determine whether the free tier is enough. Advanced CI/CD is part of the Premium tier, and the GitLab pricing page lists all three tiers as available for self-managed installations. Check licensing against each feature you plan to use before you commit.
Forgejo Actions on Forgejo
Forgejo Actions is the built-in CI system of Forgejo, and it hands workflows to separate runners. It is designed to feel familiar to GitHub Actions users, but it is not compatible with GitHub Actions, so existing workflows need changes. Forgejo itself is GPL-3.0-or-later from v9.0 onward. This card is the right choice only if you already host on Forgejo, and you should check which workflow features you rely on against the Forgejo Actions documentation.
Gitea Actions on Gitea
Gitea Actions is the built-in CI system for Gitea, the MIT-licensed lightweight Git service. It applies to teams that run Gitea and want pipelines close to their repositories without a separate CI server. Its strength matters for small teams that value a single service to operate. Confirm workflow compatibility, runner setup and feature parity with your current pipelines directly with the Gitea project, since this roundup does not cover its feature details.
What GitLab's paid tiers change for CI/CD
GitLab is the only option in this comparison with paid tiers, so choosing an edition is a cost decision that Jenkins and Woodpecker do not place on you. According to the GitLab pricing page, GitLab Free costs 0 US dollars, Premium costs 29 US dollars per user per month billed annually, and Ultimate is custom priced. All three tiers are available for self-managed installations, so you can run any of them inside your own infrastructure. Premium adds advanced CI/CD and priority support. Ultimate adds application security testing, software supply chain security, vulnerability management and compliance features. Check the GitLab pricing page for current figures, because tier contents change over time.
Jenkins is MIT licensed and Woodpecker CI is Apache-2.0 licensed, and neither project lists a paid edition on the pages this comparison draws from. Your cost with either tool is the infrastructure you run, the staff who maintain controllers, agents and plugins, and any commercial support you buy from a third party. Confirm with each vendor whether commercial support exists before you assume a gap. Jenkins upkeep includes the LTS cadence and plugin management, since LTS 2.580.1 stopped bundling several plugins, so administrators who rely on them must install them through the plugin manager. Woodpecker upkeep centers on the server, the agents and the plugin container images your pipelines call.
Before you pick a GitLab tier, count the users who would need a seat and list the CI/CD and security features your pipelines actually use. Per-user pricing grows with headcount, so a team where only a few maintainers edit pipelines has a different cost profile from one where every developer changes CI. Ask GitLab for a written quote that states the seat count, billing term, support level and the self-managed terms that apply. Also review the LICENSE file in the gitlab-org/gitlab repository, because code under the ee/ directory is proprietary and needs a paid subscription. Have legal confirm how that applies to your deployment.
How to choose and pilot a CI/CD tool
This sequence turns a shortlist of Jenkins, Woodpecker CI, GitLab CI and a forge-native option into a decision backed by your own pipelines, your own network rules and a measured picture of the upkeep each tool adds. It ends with a written recommendation that your team can defend.
Inventory the current forge and language stack
Platform engineering and the lead developers list where source code lives, which forge hosts it, which languages and build tools each service uses, and which systems the pipelines must reach, such as artifact registries, Kubernetes clusters and cloud accounts. Forge support matters early: Woodpecker documents GitHub, Gitea, Forgejo, GitLab, Bitbucket and Bitbucket Datacenter, and teams on Forgejo or Gitea can also compare Forgejo Actions or Gitea Actions. The step is done when the team has a one-page inventory that every shortlisted tool can be checked against.
Set the license posture before the pilot
Security, legal and procurement agree which license terms are acceptable for the CI system and any paid tier. Jenkins is MIT licensed, Woodpecker CI is Apache-2.0, and GitLab's source combines MIT content outside the ee/ directory with the GitLab Enterprise Edition license inside it. Ask the GitLab account team which features in your plan depend on paid tiers, because the pricing page places advanced CI/CD in Premium and compliance and supply chain features in Ultimate. The step is done when the license review is signed off and any feature that needs a paid tier is named in writing.
Map pipeline definitions to each tool
Engineers pick three or four representative repositories, one of them with the most complex build, and write down how each one is defined today and how it would be defined in each candidate. Jenkins uses a Jenkinsfile in Declarative or Scripted syntax, Woodpecker uses a .woodpecker.yaml file or a .woodpecker/ directory with depends_on ordering, and GitLab CI uses its own pipeline configuration. Note where a step depends on a plugin, a shared library or a Drone-style plugin that may need adjustment. The step is done when each repository has a side-by-side mapping with the gaps marked.
Test agents in the target infrastructure
The platform team installs a controller or server and a small set of build agents inside the environment where pipelines will actually run, including any air-gapped network. Check how agents connect, which execution backend they use (Docker, Kubernetes or the local machine for Woodpecker, or the agent layout Jenkins supports), and whether artifact registries and package mirrors are reachable without internet access. GitLab documents offline and air-gapped operation, and its reference architectures place PostgreSQL and Redis outside Kubernetes, so confirm the stateful layout too. The step is done when a pipeline runs end to end on an agent inside the target network, with the network paths documented.
Run one representative pipeline on each candidate
Each shortlisted tool runs the same representative pipeline, including a build, tests, an image build, a deployment to a non-production cluster and a failure case that checks notifications. The team records the setup hours, the number of custom steps, and any workaround needed to reach secrets or internal services. Run the pipeline on the forge the team already uses so webhook and status reporting are tested as well. The step is done when every candidate has produced the same outputs and the team can explain each difference in the results.
Check agent scaling and dependency management
Platform engineering tests how each tool adds capacity when many pipelines start at once. Jenkins recommends dedicated build agents so the controller only handles HTTP requests, and it documents adding controllers for new teams and a backup controller behind a proxy such as HAProxy or F5. Woodpecker offers an optional autoscaler that creates cloud VMs for pending builds, and GitLab's reference architectures show the scale it documents for larger user counts. Record which plugins or extensions each pipeline needs and confirm that they install and update through a controlled process. The step is done when the scaling behavior and the plugin list are both documented for the target environment.
Measure upkeep for upgrades, plugins and backups
The team estimates the recurring work for each candidate by performing one real upgrade in a staging environment, updating one plugin set, and running a restore from backup. For Jenkins, check that all configuration, plugins and secrets live in $JENKINS_HOME on the controller and that the Configuration as Code plugin's YAML is backed up with them, because that plugin does not install plugins. For GitLab, read the upgrade paths and required upgrade stops, and for Woodpecker, check the SQLite default against PostgreSQL or MariaDB for larger instances. The step is done when the team has a written upkeep log per tool that shows what was done, who did it and what broke.
Write the decision record and quote scope
The team writes a decision record that compares the results on license posture, pipeline mapping, agent behavior in the target network, pilot effort and upkeep. The record names the recommended tool, the conditions under which the rejected options would still make sense, and the open questions to confirm with each vendor. If the team needs outside help, DeployOpen scopes a fixed-scope implementation from this record, and the written scope and quote follow from it. The step is done when the record is approved by the platform, security and engineering leads and the pilot outputs are archived.
Questions teams ask before self-hosting CI/CD
What does self-hosting CI/CD cost, and what drives that cost?
The software licenses are often the smallest line. Most of the cost is people and infrastructure: engineers who install, patch and upgrade the controller or server, build agents or runners that need compute, storage for artifacts and caches, and a database for the CI system. Jenkins, Woodpecker and GitLab all have to be kept current, so the recurring cost is the upkeep rather than the first install. Costs rise with the number of pipelines, parallel builds, teams sharing one controller, and how many plugins or integrations you maintain. Ask any vendor or partner for a written quote that separates one-time setup from recurring upgrades, agent capacity, backup and support. The quote should name who pays for each item.
Do we need a paid GitLab tier to self-host GitLab CI/CD?
Not necessarily. GitLab Community Edition is MIT licensed for the code outside the ee/ directory, and the GitLab pricing page lists GitLab Free at 0 US dollars for self-managed installations. The paid tiers add features. According to that pricing page, Premium adds advanced CI/CD and priority support at 29 US dollars per user per month billed annually, and Ultimate adds application security testing, supply chain security and compliance features at a custom price. Confirm with GitLab which features your pipelines depend on before you decide, because the free tier and the paid code boundary should be checked against your exact requirements.
How long does a CI/CD pilot take, and what does it depend on?
No supplied source gives a standard pilot duration, so treat any number you hear as a claim to verify. The timeline depends on how many pipelines you must migrate, whether your forge already exists, how many build environments you need (Docker, Kubernetes or VMs), and whether you must run in an air-gapped network. Plugins and custom pipeline logic usually take the longest to rewrite. Ask for a fixed-scope plan with named deliverables and a written schedule before work starts. DeployOpen plans and implements most engagements under a written, fixed scope, so the timeline should follow from that agreed scope.
What does running self-hosted CI/CD ask of our internal team?
Plan for skills across four areas: the CI server or controller, build agents or runners, the pipeline definitions, and the surrounding platform. Jenkins recommends dedicated build agents so the controller only handles HTTP requests and manages the build environment, and all configuration, plugins and secrets live in $JENKINS_HOME on the controller, so backup and restore are a core duty. Woodpecker needs someone to run the server, agents and the database, and it can use Docker, Kubernetes or the local machine for workflows. GitLab's larger deployments use PostgreSQL with Patroni, Gitaly Cluster and Redis Sentinel, which needs database and storage expertise. Assess these skills before you choose the tool.
Can our own engineers run self-hosted CI/CD without an outside partner?
Often yes, if you already run Linux, containers and your forge, and you have someone accountable for upgrades and backups. Small teams with a few pipelines and a single forge can usually manage Woodpecker or a basic Jenkins setup internally. Harder cases include air-gapped networks, large GitLab installations, many Jenkins controllers, and compliance evidence that must be gathered on a schedule. Those are the situations where outside help is worth pricing. DeployOpen plans, implements, hardens, backs up, upgrades and documents self-hosted platforms in your own infrastructure, and offers ongoing support and upgrades as retainers. It does not issue audit reports or certifications, so compliance evidence still comes from your auditor.
Can Forgejo Actions or Gitea Actions replace a separate CI tool?
For some teams, yes. Forgejo Actions is a built-in CI system that hands workflows to separate runners, and the Forgejo documentation says it is designed to be familiar to GitHub Actions users but is not compatible with GitHub Actions. That means existing GitHub workflows need rewriting or testing before reuse. Check whether your builds need features the built-in system lacks, such as complex approvals, large Kubernetes-based fleets or a specific plugin you rely on. Woodpecker also supports Forgejo and Gitea as forges, so you can keep a separate CI engine while staying on the same forge. Confirm the Gitea Actions behavior and compatibility with your Gitea version directly with its project before you commit.
What is the risk of picking a CI tool whose license or support window changes?
License and maintenance status are the main risks, and they differ across the three tools. Jenkins is MIT licensed and ships LTS releases in four-week cycles. Woodpecker is Apache-2.0 and was forked from Drone 0.8 after Drone's license changed to a proprietary one, which is a useful reminder that licenses can change. GitLab's open-core model means some code sits behind a paid license. Check each project's release policy, the Java or runtime versions it supports, and whether plugins you depend on are maintained. Write down an exit plan that covers pipeline definitions and secrets, because moving those is usually the expensive part of switching later.
How DeployOpen works on this
DeployOpen plans, implements, customizes, integrates, hardens, backs up, upgrades, documents and supports self-hosted open-source platforms inside your own infrastructure, including CI/CD systems. We start from the pipeline work your teams already do, then agree the scope and deliverables in writing before any build begins.
How we scope
- Engagements are fixed-scope, with the CI/CD platform, forge integration and deliverables agreed in writing before work starts.
- We map which forge hosts your repositories, such as GitLab, Forgejo or Gitea, and confirm which CI system must integrate with it.
- Quotes follow from the written scope, so ask us to list runner, agent and Kubernetes assumptions before pricing is discussed.
How we build
- We install and configure the chosen CI engine inside your cloud accounts, data centers or air-gapped networks, with controllers or servers and build agents separated.
- We set up plugin or pipeline definitions, secrets handling and access controls for the pipelines your teams will actually run.
- We test pipeline behavior on representative repositories, including build isolation and any container or Kubernetes execution your scope requires.
How we hand over
- You receive documentation covering installation, pipeline conventions, backup of configuration and secrets, and upgrade steps for your version.
- We walk your platform, security and development teams through runbooks so the operating routine stays with your own staff.
- Handover records list the agreed deliverables, so you can check them against the written scope before the engagement closes.
How we support
- Ongoing support, upgrades and continuous testing are available as retainers, scoped separately from the initial build.
- Retainers can cover tracking of upstream release and end-of-life dates, so your team plans upgrades before support windows close.
- Ask for the support scope, response expectations and upgrade responsibilities in writing before you sign any retainer.
