ChronoFramevsLibation
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| ChronoFrame | Libation | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 63/100 | 68/100 |
| Rank in category | #8 of 41 in Photo Management | #2 of 15 in Audiobook Management |
| GitHub stars | 1 964 | 6 373 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +32 | +155 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 3 | 33 |
| Latest release | v1.0.2 · 21 Oct 2026 | v14.2.5 · 27 Oct 2026 |
| Setup | Easy | Moderate |
| Official Docker image | Yes | Yes |
| License | AGPL-3.0 | GPL-3.0 |
| Main language | Typescript | C |
Which one should you pick?
Libation scores 68/100 against 63/100 for ChronoFrame, so it is the safer default.
Libation ships more often: 33 stable releases in the past year, against 3 for ChronoFrame.
If you want the quickest setup, ChronoFrame is easier to run; Libation needs more configuration.
Libation is growing faster right now (+155 stars in 30 days).
ChronoFrame details →Libation details →
Swap a project
Keep ChronoFrame, compare it with
Keep Libation, compare it with