QGIS Web ClientvsStash
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| QGIS Web Client | Stash | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 57/100 | 78/100 |
| Rank in category | #9 of 12 in Maps | #2 of 142 in Media Management |
| GitHub stars | 383 | 13 315 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +0 | +305 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 10 | 7 |
| Latest release | ci-latest-master · 27 Oct 2026 | latest_develop · 24 Jun 2026 |
| Setup | Advanced | Easy |
| Official Docker image | Yes | Yes |
| License | BSD-2-Clause | AGPL-3.0 |
| Main language | JavaScript | Go |
Which one should you pick?
Stash scores 78/100 against 57/100 for QGIS Web Client, so it is the safer default.
QGIS Web Client ships more often: 10 stable releases in the past year, against 7 for Stash.
If you want the quickest setup, Stash is easier to run; QGIS Web Client needs more configuration.
Stash is growing faster right now (+305 stars in 30 days).
QGIS Web Client details →Stash details →
Swap a project
Keep QGIS Web Client, compare it with
Keep Stash, compare it with