arbtt vs gtimelog

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

Not the right match-up?
Featurearbttgtimelog
CategoryTime TrackingTime Tracking
LicenseGPL-2.0GPL-2.0
LanguageHaskellPython
Setup difficultyMediumEasy
Min. RAM128 MB64 MB
Deploymentbinary, sourcebare-metal, source
GitHub stars★ 354★ 276
First released20092008
ReplacesRescueTime, ManicTimeToggl

Why pick each one

Choose arbtt if…

  • Released under the GPL-2.0 license
  • Written in Haskell
  • Tiny footprint — runs in 128 MB RAM
arbtt details

Choose gtimelog if…

  • Released under the GPL-2.0 license
  • Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
  • Written in Python
  • Tiny footprint — runs in 64 MB RAM
gtimelog details

Frequently asked questions

Is arbtt or gtimelog better?

Neither is universally better. arbtt has the larger community, while gtimelog is simpler to set up (easy difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.

Are arbtt and gtimelog free and open-source?

Yes. arbtt is licensed under GPL-2.0 and gtimelog under GPL-2.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.

Can I run arbtt and gtimelog with Docker?

arbtt: check the project docs for container support. gtimelog: check the project docs for container support.

Related comparisons