Pros of Gogs

• Lighter resource footprint, suitable for low-end hardware
• Simpler setup and configuration process
• Faster initial loading times

Cons of Gogs

• Less frequent updates and slower development pace
• Fewer advanced features and integrations
• Smaller community and ecosystem

Code Comparison

Gogs:

func (repo *Repository) GetCommit(commitID string) (*git.Commit, error) {
    return repo.GitRepo.GetCommit(commitID)
}

Gitea:

func (repo *Repository) GetCommit(commitID string) (*git.Commit, error) {
    return repo.gitRepo.GetCommit(commitID)
}

The code structures are similar, reflecting their common ancestry. However, Gitea's codebase has evolved more significantly over time, incorporating additional features and optimizations.

Both Gogs and Gitea are self-hosted Git service solutions written in Go. Gogs focuses on simplicity and lightweight operation, making it ideal for personal use or small teams with limited resources. Gitea, a fork of Gogs, has grown into a more feature-rich platform with a larger community and more frequent updates. It offers advanced functionality like built-in CI/CD, package registries, and enhanced user management, making it suitable for larger organizations and more complex workflows.

Pros of OneDev

• Built-in CI/CD functionality without relying on external services
• Advanced code intelligence features, including semantic search and navigation
• More modern UI with a focus on ease of use and productivity

Cons of OneDev

• Smaller community and ecosystem compared to Gitea
• Less extensive documentation and third-party integrations
• Written in Java, which may be less appealing to some developers

Code Comparison

Gitea (Go):

func (repo *Repository) GetCommit(id SHA1) (*Commit, error) {
    c, err := repo.getCommit(id)
    if err != nil {
        return nil, err
    }
    return c, nil
}

OneDev (Java):

public Commit getCommit(ObjectId revisionId) {
    try {
        return new Commit(repository.parseCommit(revisionId));
    } catch (IOException e) {
        throw new RuntimeException(e);
    }
}

Both repositories provide self-hosted Git management solutions, but they differ in their implementation and feature sets. Gitea focuses on being a lightweight, Go-based alternative to GitHub, while OneDev aims to provide a more comprehensive development platform with built-in CI/CD and advanced code intelligence features. The choice between the two depends on specific project requirements and team preferences.

Pros of GitBucket

• Written in Scala, which may be preferred by some developers
• Simpler architecture, potentially easier to understand and modify
• Lightweight and can run as a standalone application

Cons of GitBucket

• Smaller community and fewer contributors compared to Gitea
• Less frequent updates and slower feature development
• Limited built-in CI/CD integration options

Code Comparison

Gitea (Go):

func (repo *Repository) GetOwner() (err error) {
    if repo.Owner != nil {
        return nil
    }
    repo.Owner, err = GetUserByID(repo.OwnerID)
    return err
}

GitBucket (Scala):

def getOwner(repository: RepositoryInfo)(implicit s: Session): Account = {
  getAccountByUserName(repository.owner).get
}

Both projects aim to provide self-hosted Git services, but Gitea has gained more popularity and has a larger community. Gitea is written in Go, which offers better performance and easier deployment. It also provides more features out-of-the-box, including built-in CI/CD, issue tracking, and project management tools.

GitBucket, on the other hand, offers a simpler architecture and can be a good choice for smaller teams or those familiar with Scala. However, it may lack some advanced features and integrations compared to Gitea.