MusicBotvsSeaweedFS
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| MusicBot | SeaweedFS | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 67/100 | 81/100 |
| Rank in category | #2 of 31 in Music | #1 of 11 in Cloud Storage |
| GitHub stars | 5 774 | 35 795 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +9 | +834 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 0 | 28 |
| Latest release | — | 4.51 · 25 Oct 2026 |
| Setup | Easy | Moderate |
| Official Docker image | No | Yes |
| License | Apache-2.0 | Apache-2.0 |
| Main language | Java | Go |
Which one should you pick?
SeaweedFS scores 81/100 against 67/100 for MusicBot, so it is the safer default.
SeaweedFS ships more often: 28 stable releases in the past year, against 0 for MusicBot.
If you want the quickest setup, MusicBot is easier to run; SeaweedFS needs more configuration.
SeaweedFS is growing faster right now (+834 stars in 30 days).
MusicBot details →SeaweedFS details →
Swap a project
Keep MusicBot, compare it with
Keep SeaweedFS, compare it with