DeepSeek HarnessvsQuestarr
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| DeepSeek Harness | Questarr | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 87/100 | 56/100 |
| Rank in category | #3 of 209 in AI Agents | #39 of 118 in Media Server |
| GitHub stars | 265 481 | 703 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +9 489 | +0 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 0 | 7 |
| Latest release | — | v1.5.0 · 12 Oct 2026 |
| Setup | Moderate | Easy |
| Official Docker image | No | Yes |
| License | MIT | GPL-3.0 |
| Main language | Typescript | Typescript |
Which one should you pick?
DeepSeek Harness scores 87/100 against 56/100 for Questarr, so it is the safer default.
Questarr ships more often: 7 stable releases in the past year, against 0 for DeepSeek Harness.
If you want the quickest setup, Questarr is easier to run; DeepSeek Harness needs more configuration.
DeepSeek Harness is growing faster right now (+9 489 stars in 30 days).
DeepSeek Harness details →Questarr details →