4

My current picks are Woodpecker CI and Forgejo runners. Anything else that's lightweight and easy to manage?

top 9 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] johntash@eviltoast.org 1 points 2 weeks ago

If you're already using forgejo, try forgejo actions first.

Another interesting one is Argo Workflows if you're using argocd for anything.

[-] Clearwater@lemmy.world 0 points 3 weeks ago

I run Forgejo and had issues with woodpecker's hooks breaking causing workflows to not start. Moved to Forgejo Actions which had it's own different set of quirks (really just depends on your exact deployment method), but I'm happy with it.

[-] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 0 points 3 weeks ago
[-] Clearwater@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago

First of all, I actually do prefer Forgejo Actions over Woodpecker. Once set up, my only problem with it (so far) is almost certainly caused by my infrastructure and isn't inherent to FA itself. Pecker, on the other hand, is quite a bit easier to set up and better documented, but I had that issue where it would disconnect from Forgejo and need a few buttons pressed to fix.

This one is just FA being weird:

If you want to deploy the Runner using Docker, the documentation is poor at best. From both a security and documentation standpoint, having it in its own VM is better, but you can do Docker. You just have to read and figure out more on your own. Reading through the example deployments from the documentation will eventually lead you to something along the lines of this (which I copy-pasted from my deployment rather than search for again):

forgejo-runner:
  image: code.forgejo.org/forgejo/runner:6.3.1
  restart: always
  user: 1000:1000
  environment:
    - DOCKER_HOST=tcp://dind:2376
  volumes:
    - runner_cache:/data
  depends_on:
    - dind
  command: >-
    bash -ec '
    forgejo-runner create-runner-file --name runner --instance https://${DOMAIN} --secret ${RUNNER_SECRET};
    sed -i -e "s|\"labels\": null|\"labels\": [\"docker:docker://docker.io/node:22-bookworm\", \"ubuntu-latest:docker://ghcr.io/catthehacker/ubuntu:act-latest\"]|" .runner ;
    forgejo-runner generate-config > config.yml;
    sed -i -e "s|^  network: \"\"$|  network: host|" config.yml ;
    sed -i -e "s|^  envs:$$|  envs:\n    DOCKER_HOST: tcp://dind:2376\n    CONTAINER_HOST: tcp://dind:2376|" config.yml ;
    forgejo-runner --config config.yml daemon
    '

You don't actually need to do this since you could edit the two config files yourself and bind them to the container. This is just how you automatically generate those files... And it's dumb, but it works and it means you don't have to keep track of those files.

This one is probably just my infrastructure: https://lemmy.world/comment/16093731

If you do go for FA in Docker (or Podman) and need some help, just ask. I'll post more of my compose and explain my decisions.

[-] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 1 points 2 weeks ago

My general understanding of all of this is that the Forgejo ecosystem is young and needs time to mature. I'll probably just stick with Woodpecker for now but thanks for the explanation.

[-] Clearwater@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

I agree. Forgejo itself is stable and I love it. Gitea never gave me trouble and that carried over.

Actions is just a bit hard to setup, at least for me, when I tried. We'll get there one day. (I believe the big thing is really just documentation.)

[-] DasFaultier@sh.itjust.works 0 points 3 weeks ago

The Forgejo guys have built this themselves, so I'm aiming to use that (I don't just yet, because I can't find the time).

[-] danb@feddit.uk 1 points 3 weeks ago

Just to contrast with some of the other comments regarding this, i've have a pretty good experience with this. Was fairly simple to setup up some docker-based runnings following their admin guidance. Have set up a couple (One for Codeberg, one for my own Forgejo instance) each via a seperate LXC container on my home lab. Has been relatively simple to administer so far.

The actions format may take some getting used to if not familiar with GitHub's own actions CI, which if closely emulates, but most of my projects were coming from GitHub anyway.

[-] whereisk@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago

I’ve tried it with forgejo, the recommended implementation involves spinning a temporary vm to run the integration and deployment processes, quite resource heavy and slow comparatively to the vm I have that’s running forgejo.

I think there’s an option to have the forgejo server itself run the commands without spinning up vms, but it’s not recommended due to security considerations as they’re running with the same privileges as the server - not a concern if you are the only developer connecting to a private instance of forgejo but something to keep in mind.

this post was submitted on 18 Apr 2025
4 points (100.0% liked)

Selfhosted

46789 readers
808 users here now

A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.

Rules:

  1. Be civil: we're here to support and learn from one another. Insults won't be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.

  2. No spam posting.

  3. Posts have to be centered around self-hosting. There are other communities for discussing hardware or home computing. If it's not obvious why your post topic revolves around selfhosting, please include details to make it clear.

  4. Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or github here. Just post the link for folks to click.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title (don’t cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).

  6. No trolling.

Resources:

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS