Apache Airflowvsqm-music
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| Apache Airflow | qm-music | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 84/100 | 51/100 |
| Rank in category | #2 of 32 in Workflow Automation | #20 of 59 in Music Streaming |
| GitHub stars | 47 304 | 588 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +338 | +0 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 7 | 11 |
| Latest release | providers-ydb/2.6.1 · 13 Oct 2026 | v2.5.0 · 10 Sept 2026 |
| Setup | Advanced | Easy |
| Official Docker image | Yes | Yes |
| License | Apache-2.0 | Apache-2.0 |
| Main language | Python | Java |
Which one should you pick?
Apache Airflow scores 84/100 against 51/100 for qm-music, so it is the safer default.
qm-music ships more often: 11 stable releases in the past year, against 7 for Apache Airflow.
If you want the quickest setup, qm-music is easier to run; Apache Airflow needs more configuration.
Apache Airflow is growing faster right now (+338 stars in 30 days).
Apache Airflow details →qm-music details →