automatic-ripping-machinevstemporal
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| automatic-ripping-machine | temporal | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 67/100 | 82/100 |
| Rank in category | #10 of 142 in Media Management | #1 of 1 in Workflow |
| GitHub stars | 5 391 | 24 052 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +147 | +774 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 16 | 11 |
| Latest release | 2.24.4 · 3 Oct 2026 | v1.30.8 · 12 Oct 2026 |
| Setup | Moderate | Advanced |
| Official Docker image | Yes | Yes |
| License | MIT | MIT |
| Main language | Python | Go |
Which one should you pick?
temporal scores 82/100 against 67/100 for automatic-ripping-machine, so it is the safer default.
automatic-ripping-machine ships more often: 16 stable releases in the past year, against 11 for temporal.
If you want the quickest setup, automatic-ripping-machine is easier to run; temporal needs more configuration.
temporal is growing faster right now (+774 stars in 30 days).
automatic-ripping-machine details →temporal details →