# LubeLogger vs Tube Archivist

> Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.

| | LubeLogger | Tube Archivist |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 65/100 | 72/100 ✓ |
| Rank in category | #2 of 5 in Vehicle Management | #7 of 118 in Media Server |
| GitHub stars | 2 926 | 8 552 ✓ |
| Stars, last 30 days | +69 | +83 ✓ |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 17 ✓ | 6 |
| Latest release | v1.7.4 · 14 Oct 2026 | v0.6.0 · 25 Oct 2026 ✓ |
| Setup | Easy ✓ | Advanced |
| Official Docker image | Yes | Yes |
| License | MIT | GPL-3.0 |
| Main language | JavaScript | Python |

## Which one should you pick?

Tube Archivist scores 72/100 against 65/100 for LubeLogger, so it is the safer default.

LubeLogger ships more often: 17 stable releases in the past year, against 6 for Tube Archivist.

If you want the quickest setup, LubeLogger is easier to run; Tube Archivist needs more configuration.

## Details

- [LubeLogger](https://selfhost.directory/project/lubelogger) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/lubelogger.md)
- [Tube Archivist](https://selfhost.directory/project/tube-archivist) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/tube-archivist.md)

---
Source: https://selfhost.directory/compare/lubelogger-vs-tube-archivist