Concatvstemporal
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| Concat | temporal | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 82/100 | 82/100 |
| Rank in category | #1 of 18 in Video Processing | #1 of 1 in Workflow |
| GitHub stars | 12 454 | 24 052 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +2 455 | +774 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 6 | 11 |
| Latest release | v0.2.8 · 20 Oct 2026 | v1.30.8 · 12 Oct 2026 |
| Setup | Easy | Advanced |
| Official Docker image | No | Yes |
| License | AGPL-3.0 | MIT |
| Main language | Rust | Go |
Which one should you pick?
Concat and temporal score the same (82/100), so the choice comes down to the details below.
temporal ships more often: 11 stable releases in the past year, against 6 for Concat.
If you want the quickest setup, Concat is easier to run; temporal needs more configuration.
Concat is growing faster right now (+2 455 stars in 30 days).
Concat details →temporal details →
Swap a project
Keep Concat, compare it with
Keep temporal, compare it with