PulumivsTube Archivist
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| Pulumi | Tube Archivist | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 79/100 | 72/100 |
| Rank in category | #1 of 3 in Infrastructure | #7 of 118 in Media Server |
| GitHub stars | 25 831 | 8 553 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +32 | +84 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 6 | 6 |
| Latest release | v3.273.0 · 28 Oct 2026 | v0.6.0 · 25 Oct 2026 |
| Setup | Moderate | Advanced |
| Official Docker image | Yes | Yes |
| License | Apache-2.0 | GPL-3.0 |
| Main language | Go | Python |
Which one should you pick?
Pulumi scores 79/100 against 72/100 for Tube Archivist, so it is the safer default.
If you want the quickest setup, Pulumi is easier to run; Tube Archivist needs more configuration.
Tube Archivist is growing faster right now (+84 stars in 30 days).
Pulumi details →Tube Archivist details →