head to head · open source

alive-progress vs chirpy

alive-progress has 6,307 GitHub stars, 236 forks, 20 open issues and last shipped 4 months ago. chirpy has 605 stars, 34 forks, 20 open issues and last shipped 5 months ago. alive-progress leads on adoption by 942% (6,307 vs 605 stars). alive-progress is written in Python under MIT; chirpy is written in TypeScript under AGPL-3.0. alive-progress has attracted 4% as many forks as stars, chirpy 6%. alive-progress was the more recently maintained of the two, and both are self-hostable with no licence fee.

Two open source projects, one decision. Both are free and self-hostable — the differences are community size, license terms, language stack and release pace.

alive-progress ★ 6.3K chirpy ★ 605 category Community & Social

← all 8884 open source comparisons

Side by side

alive-progress chirpy
GitHub stars ★ 6.3K ★ 605
License MIT AGPL-3.0
Written in Python TypeScript
Last push 2026-05-24 2026-04-29
Forks ⑂ 236 ⑂ 34
Self-hosting Yes Yes
Data ownership Your server Your server

pick alive-progress if

  • You weight community size — 6.3K stars and counting
  • You want the MIT license terms
  • Your stack matches Python
  • You value the larger contributor base for long-term maintenance

full alive-progress profile →

pick chirpy if

  • You want the chirpy feature set and don't need the biggest community
  • You prefer the AGPL-3.0 license terms
  • Your stack matches TypeScript
  • You evaluated both and chirpy fits your workflow better

full chirpy profile →

About alive-progress

alive progress is a Python progress bar library for long running command line processing, aimed at developers who need live throughput, an accurate ETA, and rich terminal animation instead of a static bar.

read the full alive-progress overview →

About chirpy

Chirpy is an open source comment system built as a privacy friendly and customizable alternative to Disqus. It ships as a TypeScript application built on Next.js, with TailwindCSS for styling, next auth for authentication, and tiptap for the rich text editor. The project is licensed under AGPL 3.0 and lives in the JavaScript and TypeScript ecosystem, where it competes with embedded comment widgets such as Disqus and utterances.

read the full chirpy overview →

More in Community & Social

Mastodon ★ 50K maigret ★ 38K glance ★ 37K Bluesky ★ 18K Lemmy ★ 15K giscus ★ 12K

Related comparisons

giscus vs alive-progress giscus vs gamedevmind giscus vs fider giscus vs guiadofrontend giscus vs guiadobackend giscus vs artalk giscus vs democracyos giscus vs human-review mastodon vs maigret mastodon vs glance maigret vs glance mastodon vs bluesky mastodon vs lemmy mastodon vs owncast mastodon vs misskey mastodon vs core

More Collaboration & Feedback projects

Compare either of these against the rest of the Collaboration & Feedback field.

alive-progress vs giscus alive-progress vs GameDevMind alive-progress vs Fider alive-progress vs guiadofrontend alive-progress vs guiadobackend alive-progress vs Artalk alive-progress vs democracyos alive-progress vs human-review alive-progress vs LogChimp alive-progress vs helios-server alive-progress vs Autolab alive-progress vs mouthful

Frequently asked questions

Is alive-progress or chirpy more popular?

alive-progress has 6,307 GitHub stars and chirpy has 605. alive-progress has the larger community by that measure.

Are alive-progress and chirpy free?

Both are open source. alive-progress is licensed under MIT and chirpy under AGPL-3.0. Neither carries a licence fee.

What is the difference between alive-progress and chirpy?

alive-progress is written in Python and chirpy in TypeScript. The practical differences are community size, licence terms, language stack and release cadence — all compared in the table above.

Which should I choose, alive-progress or chirpy?

Choose alive-progress if you want the larger community (6,307 stars) or its MIT licence terms. Choose chirpy if its feature set, stack or AGPL-3.0 licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.