Tube Archivistvswindmill
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| Tube Archivist | windmill | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 72/100 | 77/100 |
| Rank in category | #7 of 118 in Media Server | #6 of 32 in Workflow Automation |
| GitHub stars | 8 553 | 18 315 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +84 | +286 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 6 | 164 |
| Latest release | v0.6.0 · 25 Oct 2026 | v1.853.1 · 29 Oct 2026 |
| Setup | Advanced | Moderate |
| Official Docker image | Yes | Yes |
| License | GPL-3.0 | Other |
| Main language | Python | Rust |
Which one should you pick?
windmill scores 77/100 against 72/100 for Tube Archivist, so it is the safer default.
windmill ships more often: 164 stable releases in the past year, against 6 for Tube Archivist.
If you want the quickest setup, windmill is easier to run; Tube Archivist needs more configuration.
windmill is growing faster right now (+286 stars in 30 days).
Tube Archivist details →windmill details →
Swap a project
Keep Tube Archivist, compare it with
Keep windmill, compare it with