head to head · open source

Harness vs extension.js

Harness has 38,378 GitHub stars, 3,397 forks, 106 open issues and last shipped 2 days ago. extension.js has 5,159 stars, 139 forks, 7 open issues and last shipped yesterday. Harness leads on adoption by 644% (38,378 vs 5,159 stars). Harness is written in Go under Apache-2.0; extension.js is written in TypeScript under MIT. Harness has attracted 9% as many forks as stars, extension.js 3%. extension.js 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.

Harness ★ 38K extension.js ★ 5.2K category Developer Tools

← all 8884 open source comparisons

Side by side

Harness extension.js
GitHub stars ★ 38K ★ 5.2K
License Apache-2.0 MIT
Written in Go TypeScript
Last push 2026-09-16 2026-09-17
Forks ⑂ 3.4K ⑂ 139
Self-hosting Yes Yes
Data ownership Your server Your server

pick Harness if

  • You weight community size — 38K stars and counting
  • You want the Apache-2.0 license terms
  • Your stack matches Go
  • You value the larger contributor base for long-term maintenance

full Harness profile →

pick extension.js if

  • You want the extension.js feature set and don't need the biggest community
  • You prefer the MIT license terms
  • Your stack matches TypeScript
  • You evaluated both and extension.js fits your workflow better

full extension.js profile →

About Harness

Harness Open Source is an Apache 2.0, Go based developer platform that combines Git source control management, CI/CD pipelines, Gitspaces hosted development environments and artifact registries into one self hostable system for engineering teams that want end to end software delivery without stitching four separate products together.

read the full Harness overview →

About extension.js

extension.js is an open source cross browser extension framework written in TypeScript under the MIT license. It targets Chrome, Edge, Firefox, and Safari, and it lets developers build extensions without a separate build configuration for each browser.

read the full extension.js overview →

More in Developer Tools

OpenCode ★ 208K Langflow ★ 155K Supabase ★ 110K pi ★ 107K fastapi ★ 102K Neovim ★ 102K

Related comparisons

vite vs harness vite vs webpack vite vs appwrite vite vs parcel webpack vs appwrite vite vs dokku vite vs turborepo vite vs nx opencode vs pi opencode vs openhands opencode vs paperclip opencode vs orca opencode vs cline opencode vs aider opencode vs continue opencode vs tabby opencode vs neovim opencode vs zed langflow vs neovim langflow vs zed opencode vs kilocode opencode vs codeedit neovim vs zed langflow vs kilocode

More Build & Deployment projects

Compare either of these against the rest of the Build & Deployment field.

Harness vs vite Harness vs webpack Harness vs Appwrite Harness vs parcel Harness vs Dokku Harness vs turborepo Harness vs nx Harness vs NocoBase Harness vs gradle Harness vs rspack Harness vs devbox Harness vs xmake

Frequently asked questions

Is Harness or extension.js more popular?

Harness has 38,378 GitHub stars and extension.js has 5,159. Harness has the larger community by that measure.

Are Harness and extension.js free?

Both are open source. Harness is licensed under Apache-2.0 and extension.js under MIT. Neither carries a licence fee.

What is the difference between Harness and extension.js?

Harness is written in Go and extension.js 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, Harness or extension.js?

Choose Harness if you want the larger community (38,378 stars) or its Apache-2.0 licence terms. Choose extension.js if its feature set, stack or MIT licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.