aerc vs alps

A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted mail servers options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.

Not the right match-up?
Featureaercalps
Deploy effortRead-the-docs projectRead-the-docs project
CategoryMail ServersMail Servers
LicenseMITMIT
LanguageGoGo
Setup difficultyMediumMedium
Min. RAM64 MB64 MB
Deploymentbinary, sourcebinary, source
GitHub stars★ 3,300★ 700
First released20192020
ReplacesGmail, OutlookGmail

What are aerc and alps?

aerc

aerc is an email client for the terminal designed for power users, with support for multiple accounts, embedded terminal, and a tab-based workflow. It handles IMAP, Maildir, JMAP, and notmuch backends.

  • Terminal email client
  • Multiple account support
  • IMAP, JMAP, and notmuch
  • Embedded terminal viewer

alps

alps is a minimal webmail client that connects to IMAP and SMTP servers, designed to be lightweight and extensible. It is developed by the team behind the SourceHut mail infrastructure.

  • Minimal webmail interface
  • IMAP and SMTP support
  • Plugin system
  • No database required

aerc vs alps: key differences

Both projects are written in Go. Aerc has the considerably larger community, at 3,300 GitHub stars versus 700.

Why pick each one

Choose aerc if…

  • Released under the MIT license
  • Active community (3.3k GitHub stars)
  • Written in Go
  • Tiny footprint — runs in 64 MB RAM
aerc details

Choose alps if…

  • Released under the MIT license
  • Written in Go
  • Tiny footprint — runs in 64 MB RAM
alps details

Frequently asked questions

Is aerc or alps better?

Neither is universally better. aerc has the larger community; both share a medium setup difficulty, so the decision comes down to features and licensing.

Are aerc and alps free and open-source?

Yes. aerc is licensed under MIT and alps under MIT. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.

Can I run aerc and alps with Docker?

aerc: check the project docs for container support. alps: check the project docs for container support.

Related comparisons