Home /
Alternatives to GitHub /
GitHub vs Gitea
GitHub vs Gitea
A side-by-side look at GitHub (the paid SaaS) and Gitea (the open source alternative). Use this page to decide if the switch fits your team and workflow.
| GitHub | Gitea | |
|---|---|---|
| Tagline | Code hosting with Actions, Copilot, and Issues. | Lightweight self-hosted Git service. |
| License | Proprietary SaaS | MIT |
| Pricing | Free for public repos; Team from $4/user/month. | Free to self-host · optional paid hosted plan |
| Self-host option | No | Yes — difficulty 2/5 |
| Hosted cloud available | Yes (only option) | Yes |
| Desktop apps | Varies by product | Web only |
| Mobile apps | Official apps typically available | None official |
Ad slot — between tables
Best for
Fast, lightweight GitHub clone for small teams and self-host.
Gitea strengths
- Single Go binary — minimal install.
- Familiar GitHub-style UI.
- Actions (CI/CD) and packages built in.
Gitea weaknesses
- Governance tensions led to the Forgejo fork.
- Some enterprise features are paid.
- Smaller marketplace than GitLab/GitHub.
What's the catch with GitHub?
- Microsoft acquisition; privacy/AI-training concerns.
- Private repo features can require paid tier.
- Centralization of open-source ecosystem.
Still unsure?
Check the full list of alternatives to GitHub: see GitHub alternatives, or learn more about Gitea on its project page.
Recommended reading
When self-hosting goes wrong: seven failure modes and how to avoid them
An honest retrospective on the ways self-hosted setups break — not in theory, but in practice — and the small habits that prevent most of them.
Will the open source project you depend on still exist in three years?
Bus factor, maintainer burnout, funding models, and the signals that separate OSS projects that survive from those that quietly decay.
From SaaS to self-hosted: a 30-day migration playbook
A week-by-week plan to move one service off SaaS and onto your own server without breaking your team's workflow.