CKAN vs Backup wrapper nono Backup-rsync-time-backup
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted backup & recovery options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Not the right match-up?
CKAN
Make open data websites
VS
Backup wrapper nono Backup-rsync-time-backup
Time Machine-style backups for Linux and macOS using rsync
| Feature | CKAN | Backup wrapper nono Backup-rsync-time-backup |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Backup & Recovery | Backup & Recovery |
| License | AGPL-3.0 | MIT |
| Language | Python | Shell |
| Setup difficulty | Medium | Easy |
| Min. RAM | 512 MB | 32 MB |
| Deployment | bare-metal | binary |
| GitHub stars | ★ 5,088 | ★ 3,608 |
| First released | 2026 | 2014 |
| Replaces | — | Time Machine |
Why pick each one
Choose CKAN if…
- Released under the AGPL-3.0 license
- Mature project with 5.1k GitHub stars
- Written in Python
- Lightweight — runs in 512 MB RAM
Choose Backup wrapper nono Backup-rsync-time-backup if…
- Released under the MIT license
- Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
- Active community (3.6k GitHub stars)
- Written in Shell
Frequently asked questions
Is CKAN or Backup wrapper nono Backup-rsync-time-backup better?
Neither is universally better. CKAN has the larger community, while Backup wrapper nono Backup-rsync-time-backup is simpler to set up (easy difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.
Are CKAN and Backup wrapper nono Backup-rsync-time-backup free and open-source?
Yes. CKAN is licensed under AGPL-3.0 and Backup wrapper nono Backup-rsync-time-backup under MIT. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run CKAN and Backup wrapper nono Backup-rsync-time-backup with Docker?
CKAN: check the project docs for container support. Backup wrapper nono Backup-rsync-time-backup: check the project docs for container support.