Tube ArchivistvsTypesense
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| Tube Archivist | Typesense | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 72/100 | 79/100 |
| Rank in category | #7 of 118 in Media Server | #6 of 41 in Search Engines |
| GitHub stars | 8 552 | 27 063 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +83 | +470 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 6 | 4 |
| Latest release | v0.6.0 · 25 Oct 2026 | v30.2 · 19 Apr 2026 |
| Setup | Advanced | Easy |
| Official Docker image | Yes | Yes |
| License | GPL-3.0 | GPL-3.0 |
| Main language | Python | C |
Which one should you pick?
Typesense scores 79/100 against 72/100 for Tube Archivist, so it is the safer default.
Tube Archivist ships more often: 6 stable releases in the past year, against 4 for Typesense.
If you want the quickest setup, Typesense is easier to run; Tube Archivist needs more configuration.
Typesense is growing faster right now (+470 stars in 30 days).
Tube Archivist details →Typesense details →
Swap a project
Keep Tube Archivist, compare it with
Keep Typesense, compare it with