Bridgy vs diaspora*
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted social networks options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Not the right match-up?
Bridgy
Connect personal websites to social networks
VS
diaspora*
Privacy-focused decentralized social network
| Feature | Bridgy | diaspora* |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Social Networks | Social Networks |
| License | CC0-1.0 | AGPL-3.0 |
| Language | Python | Ruby |
| Setup difficulty | Hard | Hard |
| Min. RAM | 256 MB | 1,024 MB |
| Deployment | source | docker, bare-metal, source |
| GitHub stars | ★ 836 | ★ 13,656 |
| First released | 2013 | 2010 |
| Replaces | Disqus, Hosted social embeds | Facebook, Twitter |
Why pick each one
Choose Bridgy if…
- Released under the CC0-1.0 license
- Written in Python
- Tiny footprint — runs in 256 MB RAM
Frequently asked questions
Is Bridgy or diaspora* better?
Neither is universally better. diaspora* has the larger community; both share a hard setup difficulty, so the decision comes down to features and licensing.
Are Bridgy and diaspora* free and open-source?
Yes. Bridgy is licensed under CC0-1.0 and diaspora* under AGPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Bridgy and diaspora* with Docker?
Bridgy: check the project docs for container support. diaspora*: yes.