DeepSeek HarnessvsPulse
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| DeepSeek Harness | Pulse | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 87/100 | 71/100 |
| Rank in category | #3 of 209 in AI Agents | #2 of 19 in Infrastructure Monitoring |
| GitHub stars | 264 652 | 6 970 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +8 660 | +229 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 0 | 43 |
| Latest release | — | helm-chart-6.6.0 · 25 Oct 2026 |
| Setup | Moderate | Easy |
| Official Docker image | No | Yes |
| License | MIT | MIT |
| Main language | Typescript | Go |
Which one should you pick?
DeepSeek Harness scores 87/100 against 71/100 for Pulse, so it is the safer default.
Pulse ships more often: 43 stable releases in the past year, against 0 for DeepSeek Harness.
If you want the quickest setup, Pulse is easier to run; DeepSeek Harness needs more configuration.
DeepSeek Harness is growing faster right now (+8 660 stars in 30 days).
DeepSeek Harness details →Pulse details →