docker-pi-holevstunesynctool
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| docker-pi-hole | tunesynctool | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 77/100 | 41/100 |
| Rank in category | #3 of 41 in DNS | #43 of 59 in Music Streaming |
| GitHub stars | 11 728 | 158 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +115 | — |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 12 | 1 |
| Latest release | 2026.10.0 · 17 Oct 2026 | v1.2.2 · 6 Jun 2026 |
| Setup | Easy | Advanced |
| Official Docker image | Yes | No |
| License | Other | GPL-2.0 |
| Main language | Shell | Python |
Which one should you pick?
docker-pi-hole scores 77/100 against 41/100 for tunesynctool, so it is the safer default.
docker-pi-hole ships more often: 12 stable releases in the past year, against 1 for tunesynctool.
If you want the quickest setup, docker-pi-hole is easier to run; tunesynctool needs more configuration.
docker-pi-hole is growing faster right now (+115 stars in 30 days).
docker-pi-hole details →tunesynctool details →
Swap a project
Keep docker-pi-hole, compare it with
Keep tunesynctool, compare it with