head to head · open source

ranger vs PasswordPusher

ranger has 17,414 GitHub stars, 943 forks, 896 open issues and last shipped 18 days ago. PasswordPusher has 3,202 stars, 460 forks, 105 open issues and last shipped 2 days ago. ranger leads on adoption by 444% (17,414 vs 3,202 stars). ranger is written in Python under GPL-3.0; PasswordPusher is written in Ruby under Apache-2.0. ranger has attracted 5% as many forks as stars, PasswordPusher 14%. PasswordPusher 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.

ranger ★ 17K PasswordPusher ★ 3.2K category Productivity & Utilities

← all 20902 open source comparisons

Side by side

ranger PasswordPusher
GitHub stars ★ 17K ★ 3.2K
License GPL-3.0 Apache-2.0
Written in Python Ruby
Last push 2026-09-09 2026-09-25
Forks ⑂ 943 ⑂ 460
Self-hosting Yes Yes
Data ownership Your server Your server

pick ranger if

  • You weight community size — 17K stars and counting
  • You want the GPL-3.0 license terms
  • Your stack matches Python
  • You value the larger contributor base for long-term maintenance

full ranger profile →

pick PasswordPusher if

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

full PasswordPusher profile →

About ranger

Ranger is a console file manager with VI key bindings, written in Python and released under the GNU General Public License version 3, for terminal users who want to browse, preview, and manipulate files without leaving a Unix shell.

read the full ranger overview →

About PasswordPusher

PasswordPusher is an Apache 2.0 licensed Ruby web application for sharing passwords, notes, files and URLs as self deleting links that expire after a set number of views or a set duration, with audit logs recording who viewed what, and when.

read the full PasswordPusher overview →

More in Productivity & Utilities

n8n ★ 206K Excalidraw ★ 133K RustDesk ★ 125K LocalSend ★ 93K AppFlowy ★ 77K OBS Studio ★ 77K

Related comparisons

localsend vs rclone localsend vs copyparty localsend vs files localsend vs yazi localsend vs spacedrive localsend vs nextcloud localsend vs uppy localsend vs cloudreve openclaw vs khoj open-webui vs open-notebook open-webui vs khoj appflowy vs affine appflowy vs memos appflowy vs plane appflowy vs joplin mem0 vs memos n8n vs langchain n8n vs browser-use firecrawl vs browser-use n8n vs langgraph n8n vs frigate n8n vs lightpanda n8n vs proxmoxve n8n vs activepieces

More File Management & Sync projects

Compare either of these against the rest of the File Management & Sync field.

ranger vs LocalSend ranger vs rclone ranger vs copyparty ranger vs Files ranger vs yazi ranger vs Spacedrive ranger vs Nextcloud ranger vs uppy ranger vs cloudreve ranger vs superfile ranger vs Seafile ranger vs PairDrop

Frequently asked questions

Is ranger or PasswordPusher more popular?

ranger has 17,414 GitHub stars and PasswordPusher has 3,202. ranger has the larger community by that measure.

Are ranger and PasswordPusher free?

Both are open source. ranger is licensed under GPL-3.0 and PasswordPusher under Apache-2.0. Neither carries a licence fee.

What is the difference between ranger and PasswordPusher?

ranger is written in Python and PasswordPusher in Ruby. The practical differences are community size, licence terms, language stack and release cadence — all compared in the table above.

Which should I choose, ranger or PasswordPusher?

Choose ranger if you want the larger community (17,414 stars) or its GPL-3.0 licence terms. Choose PasswordPusher if its feature set, stack or Apache-2.0 licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.