head to head · open source
tubearchivist vs foss_photo_libraries
tubearchivist has 8,451 GitHub stars, 420 forks, 25 open issues and last shipped 21 days ago. foss_photo_libraries has 2,803 stars, 72 forks, 27 open issues and last shipped 5 months ago. tubearchivist leads on adoption by 201% (8,451 vs 2,803 stars). tubearchivist is written in Python under GPL-3.0; foss_photo_libraries is written in Python under MIT. tubearchivist has attracted 5% as many forks as stars, foss_photo_libraries 3%. tubearchivist 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.
← all 8884 open source comparisons
Side by side
| tubearchivist | foss_photo_libraries | |
|---|---|---|
| GitHub stars | ★ 8.5K | ★ 2.8K |
| License | GPL-3.0 | MIT |
| Written in | Python | Python |
| Last push | 2026-08-28 | 2026-04-18 |
| Forks | ⑂ 420 | ⑂ 72 |
| Self-hosting | Yes | Yes |
| Data ownership | Your server | Your server |
pick tubearchivist if
- You weight community size — 8.5K 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
pick foss_photo_libraries if
- You want the foss_photo_libraries feature set and don't need the biggest community
- You prefer the MIT license terms
- Your stack matches Python
- You evaluated both and foss_photo_libraries fits your workflow better
About tubearchivist
Tube Archivist is a self hosted YouTube media server that downloads videos with yt dlp, indexes them with metadata from YouTube, and serves them back through a searchable web interface, built for people whose personal YouTube archive has grown past the point where folders and filenames still work.
read the full tubearchivist overview →
About foss_photo_libraries
foss photo libraries is a free and open source comparison project for photo libraries and digital asset management tools. It is an MIT licensed Python repository that maintains a public list of alternatives, including Chevereto, Damselfly, Ente, Foldergram, HomeGallery, Immich, Librephotos, Lychee, Nextcloud Photos, Nextcloud Memories, Photonix, Photofield, PiGallery2, PhotoPrism, Photoview, Piwigo, and Snapcrescent.
read the full foss_photo_libraries overview →
More in Content & Publishing
Related comparisons
More Digital Asset Management (DAM) projects
Compare either of these against the rest of the Digital Asset Management (DAM) field.
Frequently asked questions
Is tubearchivist or foss_photo_libraries more popular?
tubearchivist has 8,451 GitHub stars and foss_photo_libraries has 2,803. tubearchivist has the larger community by that measure.
Are tubearchivist and foss_photo_libraries free?
Both are open source. tubearchivist is licensed under GPL-3.0 and foss_photo_libraries under MIT. Neither carries a licence fee.
What is the difference between tubearchivist and foss_photo_libraries?
tubearchivist is written in Python and foss_photo_libraries in Python. The practical differences are community size, licence terms, language stack and release cadence — all compared in the table above.
Which should I choose, tubearchivist or foss_photo_libraries?
Choose tubearchivist if you want the larger community (8,451 stars) or its GPL-3.0 licence terms. Choose foss_photo_libraries if its feature set, stack or MIT licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.