head to head · open source

alive-progress vs pretty

alive-progress has 6,307 GitHub stars, 236 forks, 20 open issues and last shipped 4 months ago. pretty has 624 stars, 29 forks, 3 open issues and last shipped 11 days ago. alive-progress leads on adoption by 911% (6,307 vs 624 stars). alive-progress is written in Python under MIT; pretty is written in Clojure under Apache-2.0. alive-progress has attracted 4% as many forks as stars, pretty 5%. pretty was the more recently maintained of the two, and both are self-hostable with no licence fee. The two share 1 topic tag (feedback), so they are genuine substitutes rather than adjacent tools.

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 pretty ★ 624 category Community & Social

← all 8884 open source comparisons

Side by side

alive-progress pretty
GitHub stars ★ 6.3K ★ 624
License MIT Apache-2.0
Written in Python Clojure
Last push 2026-05-24 2026-09-07
Forks ⑂ 236 ⑂ 29
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 pretty if

  • You want the pretty feature set and don't need the biggest community
  • You prefer the Apache-2.0 license terms
  • Your stack matches Clojure
  • You evaluated both and pretty fits your workflow better

full pretty 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 pretty

pretty is an Apache 2.0 Clojure library, published on Clojars as org.clj commons/pretty, that formats exception output, ANSI fonts and binary data so developers can read console and REPL output more easily.

read the full pretty 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 pretty more popular?

alive-progress has 6,307 GitHub stars and pretty has 624. alive-progress has the larger community by that measure.

Are alive-progress and pretty free?

Both are open source. alive-progress is licensed under MIT and pretty under Apache-2.0. Neither carries a licence fee.

What is the difference between alive-progress and pretty?

alive-progress is written in Python and pretty in Clojure. 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 pretty?

Choose alive-progress if you want the larger community (6,307 stars) or its MIT licence terms. Choose pretty if its feature set, stack or Apache-2.0 licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.