Compare
Up to three tools. The table shows the data as-is, without picking a “best”.
| Field | act | Lazygit | ntfy |
|---|---|---|---|
| Platforms | GitHub | Universal | Universal |
| Local support | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Paid API | No | No | No |
| License | MIT | MIT | Apache-2.0 / GPL-2.0 |
| Stars | 72437 | 83385 | 35017 |
| Last activity | — | October 15, 2026 | September 29, 2026 |
| Install complexity | — | سهل للتثبيت؛ يحتاج معرفة Git / Easy to install; Git knowledge required | سهل للتجربة، متوسط للاستضافة الآمنة / Easy to try, moderate to self-host securely |
| Category | Testing, Git, DevOps | Code Review, Git | Workflow, DevOps |
| Best use | Best for a developer or small team that repeatedly edits GitHub Actions workflows and wants to test a job before pushing. It provides a local run log, while a final GitHub check remains necessary. It is not suitable when exact hosted-runner parity is required. | Best for a solo developer or small team that works from the terminal and wants focused, reviewable commits. It helps select changes and open another branch in a separate working folder. It does not replace tests or Git knowledge; your editor interface may already be enough. | Best for an individual developer or small team that wants backup, deployment, and scheduled-job alerts without building a notification app. It starts with one HTTP request and can be self-hosted with users and ACLs. It is not a complete incident-management or log-retention system. |