Hosting
Self-Hosted Git Service Comparison
A comparison of self-hosted Git solutions including GitLab CE, Gitea, Gogs, and others — covering features, deployment, and maintenance.
- Team leads or developers choosing a Git hosting solution
- Basic Git remote operation knowledge
- Understanding of code hosting requirements
- Comparing only feature lists while ignoring operational costs
- Choosing a self-hosted solution without sufficient maintenance capacity
One-Sentence Understanding
Self-hosted Git services give you full control over code data, permissions, and DevOps pipelines — ideal for teams with compliance, data sovereignty, or customization needs.
Why Self-Host?
| Factor | Cloud | Self-Hosted |
|---|---|---|
| Data sovereignty | Third-party | Full control |
| Compliance | Must evaluate | Self-managed |
| Customization | Limited | Full control |
| Operations | Zero ops | Requires maintenance |
| Availability | SLA | Self-managed |
| Updates | Instant | Manual upgrades |
Popular Solutions
GitLab CE
Most complete self-hosted DevOps platform.
Deploy: Omnibus / Docker / Helm (K8s)
Resources: 4GB RAM minimum, 8GB+ recommended
Coverage: Full DevOps (CI/CD, Registry, Pages, K8s)
Pros:
- Most feature-complete
- Built-in CI/CD (shared Runners)
- LDAP, SAML, OAuth support
- Active community
Cons:
- Heavy resource usage
- Upgrades may have breaking changes
- Complex configuration
Gitea
Lightweight Git service in Go.
Deploy: Single binary / Docker
Resources: 1GB RAM minimum, 256MB usable
Coverage: Code + Issues + PR + Actions (experimental)
Pros:
- Extremely lightweight (runs on Raspberry Pi)
- Simple deploy (one binary)
- Very low resource usage
- LDAP, OAuth support
Cons:
- CI/CD is newer (Gitea Actions)
- Smaller plugin ecosystem
- Limited large-repo performance
Gogs
The original lightweight Go Git service (predecessor to Gitea).
Deploy: Single binary / Docker
Resources: 512MB RAM minimum, 128MB usable
Coverage: Core hosting + Issues + PR
Pros:
- Lightest option
- Simplest deploy
- Good for tiny teams
Cons:
- Least featured, slower updates
- No built-in CI/CD
- Smallest community
Other Options
| Solution | Language | Highlights |
|---|---|---|
| Gitea Fork (Codeberg) | Go | Community fork of Gitea |
| Onedev | Java | Built-in CI/CD, rich features |
| RhodeCode | Python | Enterprise code review |
| Bitbucket DC | Java | Atlassian ecosystem |
Deployment
Docker Quick Start
# docker-compose.yml
version: '3'
services:
gitea:
image: gitea/gitea:latest
ports:
- "3000:3000"
- "22:22"
volumes:
- ./gitea:/data
restart: always
gitlab:
image: gitlab/gitlab-ce:latest
ports:
- "8080:80"
- "2222:22"
volumes:
- ./gitlab/config:/etc/gitlab
- ./gitlab/logs:/var/log/gitlab
- ./gitlab/data:/var/opt/gitlab
Backup Strategy
# GitLab backup
gitlab-rake gitlab:backup:create
# Gitea backup
rsync -av /path/to/gitea/data/ /backup/gitea/
# Generic Git backup
git clone --mirror <url> backup.git
Recommendation
| Team Size | Solution | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
| 1-5 | Gitea | Minimal deploy, low maintenance |
| 5-20 | Gitea / GitLab CE | Depends on CI/CD needs |
| 20-100 | GitLab CE | Complete DevOps |
| 100+ | GitLab EE / GitHub ES | Enterprise features |
| High compliance | GitLab EE / Bitbucket DC | Audit and management |
Continue Learning
hosting/platform-comparison— Platform comparisongithub/github-actions-and-skills— CI/CD integrationgitlab/gitlab-ci-and-runners— GitLab CI setupinternals/transfer-protocols-and-negotiation— Git protocols
Previous / Next
PreviousGit Platform Comparison: GitHub vs GitLab vs BitbucketCommands
NextNo more reads in this direction