qm-musicvsStirling-PDF
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| qm-music | Stirling-PDF | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 51/100 | 87/100 |
| Rank in category | #20 of 59 in Music Streaming | #1 of 46 in Document Management |
| GitHub stars | 588 | 95 273 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +0 | +2 311 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 11 | 25 |
| Latest release | v2.5.0 · 10 Sept 2026 | v3.2.2 · 24 Oct 2026 |
| Setup | Easy | Moderate |
| Official Docker image | Yes | Yes |
| License | Apache-2.0 | Other |
| Main language | Java | Typescript |
Which one should you pick?
Stirling-PDF scores 87/100 against 51/100 for qm-music, so it is the safer default.
Stirling-PDF ships more often: 25 stable releases in the past year, against 11 for qm-music.
If you want the quickest setup, qm-music is easier to run; Stirling-PDF needs more configuration.
Stirling-PDF is growing faster right now (+2 311 stars in 30 days).
qm-music details →Stirling-PDF details →
Swap a project
Keep qm-music, compare it with
Keep Stirling-PDF, compare it with