TimeTracker 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?
TimeTracker
Self-hosted web-based time tracking for teams
VS
gtimelog
Minimalist time logging desktop application
| Feature | TimeTracker | gtimelog |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Time Tracking | Time Tracking |
| License | MIT | GPL-2.0 |
| Language | Python | Python |
| Setup difficulty | Medium | Easy |
| Min. RAM | 256 MB | 64 MB |
| Deployment | docker, source | bare-metal, source |
| GitHub stars | ★ 615 | ★ 276 |
| First released | 2024 | 2008 |
| Replaces | Toggl, Harvest | Toggl |
Why pick each one
Choose TimeTracker if…
- Released under the MIT license
- First-class Docker support for quick deployment
- Written in Python
- Tiny footprint — runs in 256 MB RAM
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
Frequently asked questions
Is TimeTracker or gtimelog better?
Neither is universally better. TimeTracker 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 TimeTracker and gtimelog free and open-source?
Yes. TimeTracker is licensed under MIT and gtimelog under GPL-2.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run TimeTracker and gtimelog with Docker?
TimeTracker: yes. gtimelog: check the project docs for container support.