Roundcube vs Himalaya
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?
Roundcube
Browser-based IMAP webmail client
VS
Himalaya
Modern command-line email client written in Rust
| Feature | Roundcube | Himalaya |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Mail Servers | Mail Servers |
| License | GPL-3.0 | MIT |
| Language | PHP | Rust |
| Setup difficulty | Easy | Medium |
| Min. RAM | 256 MB | 64 MB |
| Deployment | docker, bare-metal, source | binary, source |
| GitHub stars | ★ 7,118 | ★ 6,962 |
| First released | 2008 | 2021 |
| Replaces | Gmail, Outlook Web | Mutt, Outlook |
Why pick each one
Choose Himalaya if…
- Released under the MIT license
- Mature project with 7k GitHub stars
- Written in Rust
- Tiny footprint — runs in 64 MB RAM
Frequently asked questions
Is Roundcube or Himalaya better?
Roundcube is the stronger all-round pick: it has both the larger community and the simpler easy setup. Consider Himalaya if its specific feature set fits your needs better.
Are Roundcube and Himalaya free and open-source?
Yes. Roundcube is licensed under GPL-3.0 and Himalaya under MIT. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Roundcube and Himalaya with Docker?
Roundcube: yes. Himalaya: check the project docs for container support.