head to head · open source
tubearchivist vs HolyArrs
tubearchivist has 8,591 GitHub stars, 433 forks, 25 open issues and last shipped 18 days ago. HolyArrs has 786 stars, 38 forks, 77 open issues and last shipped yesterday. tubearchivist leads on adoption by 993% (8,591 vs 786 stars). tubearchivist is written in Python under GPL-3.0; HolyArrs is written in Go under AGPL-3.0. tubearchivist has attracted 5% as many forks as stars, HolyArrs 5%. HolyArrs was the more recently maintained of the two, and both are self-hostable with no licence fee. The two share 1 topic tag (media-server), 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.
← all 20902 open source comparisons
Side by side
| tubearchivist | HolyArrs | |
|---|---|---|
| GitHub stars | ★ 8.6K | ★ 786 |
| License | GPL-3.0 | AGPL-3.0 |
| Written in | Python | Go |
| Last push | 2026-10-25 | 2026-11-11 |
| Forks | ⑂ 433 | ⑂ 38 |
| Self-hosting | Yes | Yes |
| Data ownership | Your server | Your server |
pick tubearchivist if
- You weight community size — 8.6K 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 HolyArrs if
- You want the HolyArrs feature set and don't need the biggest community
- You prefer the AGPL-3.0 license terms
- Your stack matches Go
- You evaluated both and HolyArrs fits your workflow better
About tubearchivist
more screenshots and video Table of contents Docs with FAQ, and API documentation Core functionality Resources Installing Getting Started Known limitations Port Collisions Common Errors Roadmap Donate Core functionality Once your YouTube video collection grows, it becomes hard to search and find a specific video. That's where Tube Archivist comes in: By indexing your video collection with metadata from YouTube, you can organize, search and enjoy your archived YouTube videos without hassle offline through a convenient web interface. This includes: Subscribe to your favorite YouTube channels Download Videos using…
read the full tubearchivist overview →
About HolyArrs
English · 简体中文 · हिन्दी · Español · Français · العربية · Português · Русский · 日本語 · Deutsch · 한국어 · Italiano · Polski · Nederlands · Türkçe · Українська Six apps to watch a show. Now it's one. HolyArrs is one self hosted app for your shows, movies and music. Browse like a streaming app, ask for what you want, and it handles the rest. About 15 MB to download · about 140 MB of RAM idle with 10,000 titles · amd64, arm64, armv7 The six apps it replaces download 718.2 MB together. Quick start · Why · What it does · Moving from other apps · The manual · Help 🚀 Running in two minutes Save this as docker compose.yml…
read the full HolyArrs 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 HolyArrs more popular?
tubearchivist has 8,591 GitHub stars and HolyArrs has 786. tubearchivist has the larger community by that measure.
Are tubearchivist and HolyArrs free?
Both are open source. tubearchivist is licensed under GPL-3.0 and HolyArrs under AGPL-3.0. Neither carries a licence fee.
What is the difference between tubearchivist and HolyArrs?
tubearchivist is written in Python and HolyArrs in Go. 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 HolyArrs?
Choose tubearchivist if you want the larger community (8,591 stars) or its GPL-3.0 licence terms. Choose HolyArrs if its feature set, stack or AGPL-3.0 licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.