retroassemblyvsStirling-PDF
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| retroassembly | Stirling-PDF | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 56/100 | 87/100 |
| Rank in category | #5 of 5 in Emulation | #1 of 46 in Document Management |
| GitHub stars | 1 153 | 95 289 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +72 | +2 327 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 3 | 25 |
| Latest release | v7.260719.1051 · 19 Jul 2026 | v3.2.2 · 24 Oct 2026 |
| Setup | Easy | Moderate |
| Official Docker image | Yes | Yes |
| License | MIT | Other |
| Main language | Typescript | Typescript |
Which one should you pick?
Stirling-PDF scores 87/100 against 56/100 for retroassembly, so it is the safer default.
Stirling-PDF ships more often: 25 stable releases in the past year, against 3 for retroassembly.
If you want the quickest setup, retroassembly is easier to run; Stirling-PDF needs more configuration.
Stirling-PDF is growing faster right now (+2 327 stars in 30 days).
retroassembly details →Stirling-PDF details →