bupha vs hosted CI

bupha runs push-triggered CI on self-controlled hardware — not a GHA replacement at fleet scale.

vs GitHub Actions

	bupha	GitHub Actions
compute	your box	managed fleet
queue	latest-wins + bounded all, no cold start	unlimited parallelism, queue wait
secrets	never leave the machine	hosted on GitHub
cache	your backend — local disk or your S3/R2/minio	hosted cache
pipeline def	your runner — ci.sh or dagger module	YAML DSL + marketplace actions
local == CI	bupha run is literally the same path	act approximates
batching	supersede built-in, honest "cancelled" statuses	concurrency groups
scale	one worker, serialized runs	matrix/fleet
cost	your box only	minutes billing

When GHA is better: you need parallelism, matrices across OSes, hosted macOS/Windows builds, or marketplace actions. When bupha fits: instant feedback on self-owned hardware, secrets that never leave the machine, warm caches on self-owned storage, no YAML.

vs others

• Jenkins/Buildkite — bupha is a single binary with a TOML file, not a server product to operate.
• Woodpecker/Forgejo CI — bupha is forge-webhook driven and much smaller; those are full pipeline platforms.
• self-hosted GHA runner — bupha is lighter (no runner service, no org config) but has no matrix or marketplace.