PipesvsStirling-PDF
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| Pipes | Stirling-PDF | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 44/100 | 87/100 |
| Rank in category | #52 of 85 in Feed Reader | #1 of 46 in Document Management |
| GitHub stars | 282 | 95 309 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +0 | +2 347 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 0 | 25 |
| Latest release | — | v3.2.2 · 24 Oct 2026 |
| Setup | Advanced | Moderate |
| Official Docker image | No | Yes |
| License | AGPL-3.0 | Other |
| Main language | JavaScript | Typescript |
Which one should you pick?
Stirling-PDF scores 87/100 against 44/100 for Pipes, so it is the safer default.
Stirling-PDF ships more often: 25 stable releases in the past year, against 0 for Pipes.
If you want the quickest setup, Stirling-PDF is easier to run; Pipes needs more configuration.
Stirling-PDF is growing faster right now (+2 347 stars in 30 days).
Pipes details →Stirling-PDF details →