DeepSeek HarnessvsZero to JupyterHub with Kubernetes
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| DeepSeek Harness | Zero to JupyterHub with Kubernetes | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 87/100 | 64/100 |
| Rank in category | #3 of 209 in AI Agents | #4 of 11 in Container Orchestration |
| GitHub stars | 264 755 | 1 725 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +8 763 | — |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 0 | 9 |
| Latest release | — | 4.4.4 · 20 Oct 2026 |
| Setup | Moderate | Advanced |
| Official Docker image | No | Yes |
| License | MIT | Other |
| Main language | Typescript | Python |
Which one should you pick?
DeepSeek Harness scores 87/100 against 64/100 for Zero to JupyterHub with Kubernetes, so it is the safer default.
Zero to JupyterHub with Kubernetes ships more often: 9 stable releases in the past year, against 0 for DeepSeek Harness.
If you want the quickest setup, DeepSeek Harness is easier to run; Zero to JupyterHub with Kubernetes needs more configuration.
DeepSeek Harness is growing faster right now (+8 763 stars in 30 days).
DeepSeek Harness details →Zero to JupyterHub with Kubernetes details →