Self-Hosted Git Forge

Executive Summary

Six self-hosted Git forge platforms were investigated for hosting Nagato Game Assist and other recurring projects. The landscape splits into three tiers:

• Tier 1 - Recommended: Forgejo - lightweight, community-governed, GitHub Actions-compatible CI, runs on 512MB RAM, drop-in Gitea replacement with non-profit governance
• Tier 2 - Viable Alternatives: OneDev (all-in-one platform with built-in CI/PM/code intelligence, but 3x RAM cost) and Gitea (company-backed Forgejo twin, MIT license, Enterprise tier)
• Tier 3 - Not Recommended: Gogs (minimal but slow development, recent RCE vulnerability), Radicle (P2P, no server model, too experimental), SourceHut (email-based workflow, no PR UI, niche)

1. Forgejo RECOMMENDED

'Beyond coding. We forge.' - Community-governed fork of Gitea under Codeberg e.V.

Detailed Analysis

History: Forgejo was forked from Gitea in late 2022 after the Gitea trademark/domain was transferred to a for-profit company (Gitea Limited) without community consultation. It became a hard fork in early 2024 and is now governed by Codeberg e.V., a German non-profit with an elected council. All development happens on Codeberg.org using Forgejo itself (dogfooding).

CI/CD: Forgejo Actions uses a workflow syntax familiar to GitHub Actions users. A separate runner process (forgejo-runner) executes jobs in Docker containers. Many GitHub Actions workflows transfer with minor modifications - you typically need to set jobs.<job_id>.container.image to a compatible image like ghcr.io/catthehacker/ubuntu:act-22.04. Documented incompatibilities exist around permissions subkeys, continue-on-error, and OIDC syntax.

Security: Forgejo publishes security advisories to everyone through public channels. This contrasts with Gitea, which reserves advance security notices for paying Enterprise customers. Forgejo also runs end-to-end and upgrade tests that Gitea lacks.

For Nagato: Forgejo can host all your repos (nagato-game-assist, nagato-genui, nagato-ai-council) with private visibility, issues, PRs, and CI. The GitHub Actions compatibility means your existing workflow files mostly transfer. The container registry can host MSIX build artifacts. The low RAM footprint means it can run alongside your existing gaem-proxy, GTC Docker stack, and other services on your Windows machine.

2. OneDev VIABLE ALTERNATIVE

'The Unified and Autonomous Development Platform' - All-in-one: Git + CI/CD + Kanban + Code Intelligence

Detailed Analysis

Architecture: OneDev is fundamentally different from Gitea/Forgejo. It is a project-management-and-CI platform that happens to host Git, not a Git server with PM bolt on. The CI/CD build daemon lives inside the OneDev server process, so CI works the moment the platform is up - no separate runner deployment needed. This is a genuine operational simplification.

Code Intelligence: OneDev's standout feature is built-in code intelligence - symbol search, go-to-definition, and find-references work across Java, JavaScript, C, C++, C#, Go, PHP, and Python without cloning the repo. Gitea and Forgejo have nothing equivalent built in.

AI Integration: OneDev has built-in AI features - AI users that can implement issues, review PRs, fix CI/CD failures, and resolve merge conflicts. It ships a CLI (TOD) and skills for coding agents. This is interesting but requires external API endpoints.

The Migration Trap: There is no migration path between the Gitea/Forgejo family and OneDev. Different data model, different CI format, different schema. If you start on Forgejo and later decide you want OneDev (or reverse), it is a repo-by-repo API move that loses CI history and PM data. This is a one-way, lossy trip.

For Nagato: OneDev's built-in PM and code intelligence are attractive, but the 3x RAM cost is significant when running alongside your existing stack. The lack of GitHub Actions compatibility means rewriting all workflow files. The AI teammate feature is interesting but may conflict with your existing Hermes-based agent workflow.

3. Gogs NOT RECOMMENDED

'A painless self-hosted Git service' - The original lightweight Go Git service (2014)

Detailed Analysis

History: Gogs is the grandparent of the lightweight Go Git forge family. Gitea was forked from Gogs in 2016, and Forgejo was forked from Gitea in 2022. Both forks have significantly surpassed Gogs in features, community, and development pace.

Maintenance Status: Gogs is still maintained but at a slow pace by primarily one maintainer (Unknwon). The latest release is v0.14.3 (June 7, 2026), which fixed an authenticated RCE vulnerability (CVE-2026-52806). The project has been stuck at v0.x for 12 years and has never reached a 1.0 release.

Security: The recent RCE vulnerability (argument injection via crafted branch names in pull requests) is concerning. It was fixed in 0.14.3, but the fact that such a vulnerability existed in a mature project with a single maintainer raises questions about the security review process.

For Nagato: Gogs is too minimal for your needs. No CI/CD, no container registry, no package registry, and a slower development pace. Both Gitea and Forgejo are strictly better choices - they are forks of Gogs that have added all the features Gogs lacks.

4. Gitea VIABLE ALTERNATIVE

'Git with a cup of tea' - Company-backed fork of Gogs, the parent of Forgejo

Detailed Analysis

vs Forgejo: For core Git hosting, Gitea and Forgejo are a near-tie. Same codebase lineage, same Go binary, same DB schema, nearly identical UI. The real difference is governance: Gitea is company-backed (Gitea Limited / CommitGo) with an Enterprise tier, while Forgejo is non-profit governed (Codeberg e.V.) with all features free.

Security Asymmetry: Gitea reserves advance security notices for paying Enterprise customers. Self-hosted admins on the free tier can be exposed to known vulnerabilities longer than paying customers. Forgejo publishes security advisories to everyone.

For Nagato: Gitea is a perfectly functional forge, but Forgejo is the better choice unless you specifically need the MIT license, the Enterprise tier, or have an existing Gitea investment. The governance and security disclosure differences are meaningful for a long-term hosting decision.

5. Radicle NOT RECOMMENDED

'The sovereign forge' - Peer-to-peer, decentralized, serverless code collaboration

Detailed Analysis

Radicle is architecturally fascinating but solves a different problem. It is a peer-to-peer code collaboration stack where repositories are replicated across nodes in a decentralized network. There is no server to self-host - you run a Radicle node on your machine and it syncs with other peers.

For your use case (hosting Nagato and other projects with a web UI, CI/CD, issues, and PRs), Radicle is the wrong tool. It lacks a traditional web forge UI, CI/CD, container registry, and package registry. The P2P model is interesting for censorship-resistant open source collaboration but does not fit a private project hosting scenario.

6. SourceHut NOT RECOMMENDED

'The hacker's forge' - Email-driven, minimalist, Unix-philosophy code collaboration

Detailed Analysis

SourceHut takes a radically different approach: a suite of composable tools (git.sr.ht, builds.sr.ht, todo.sr.ht, lists.sr.ht) with an email-driven code review workflow. There are no pull requests - patches are sent via mailing lists, similar to how the Linux kernel works. It has almost no JavaScript and prioritizes speed and simplicity.

While self-hostable (the full stack is AGPL-3.0), it requires deploying multiple services and is still in alpha. The email-based workflow is a significant departure from the GitHub-style PR workflow you are used to with Nagato. No container registry, no package registry, and no GitHub Actions compatibility make it impractical for your use case.

Feature Comparison Matrix

Resource & Cost Comparison

Tested RAM figures from nodatools.com benchmark (fresh VPS, 2026):

Recommendation for Nagato Game Assist

When to consider OneDev instead

OneDev is worth a second look if:

• You want built-in Kanban/project management and are tired of using GitHub issues for that
• You want code intelligence (symbol search, go-to-definition) in the browser without cloning
• You are starting fresh with no existing GitHub Actions workflows to migrate
• You want CI/CD without deploying a separate runner process
• You have RAM to spare (4GB+ for the forge alone)

For your current setup, none of these outweigh Forgejo's advantages. Your Hermes-based agent workflow already handles orchestration, and your existing CI needs are met by Forgejo Actions.

When to consider Gitea instead

Gitea is worth considering if:

• You specifically need the MIT license (more permissive than Forgejo's GPL-3.0)
• You want the Enterprise tier (SSO, audit logs, SLA at .50-9/user/mo)
• You want the largest community/ecosystem and maximum tutorial availability

For a solo developer / small team project like Nagato, these do not outweigh Forgejo's governance and security advantages.

Migration Path: GitHub to Forgejo

If you decide to proceed with Forgejo, here is the high-level migration plan:

Repos to migrate

Excluded Platforms