Fedora Commons Repository vs Filestash
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted document management options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Not the right match-up?
Fedora Commons Repository
Robust and modular repository system for the management and
VS
Filestash
Web-based file manager and document gateway
| Feature | Fedora Commons Repository | Filestash |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Document Management | Document Management |
| License | Apache-2.0 | AGPL-3.0 |
| Language | Java | Go |
| Setup difficulty | Medium | Easy |
| Min. RAM | 512 MB | 256 MB |
| Deployment | bare-metal | docker, binary, bare-metal |
| GitHub stars | ★ 253 | ★ 14,451 |
| First released | 2026 | 2017 |
| Replaces | — | Dropbox, SharePoint |
Why pick each one
Choose Fedora Commons Repository if…
- Released under the Apache-2.0 license
- Written in Java
- Lightweight — runs in 512 MB RAM
Frequently asked questions
Is Fedora Commons Repository or Filestash better?
Filestash is the stronger all-round pick: it has both the larger community and the simpler easy setup. Consider Fedora Commons Repository if its specific feature set fits your needs better.
Are Fedora Commons Repository and Filestash free and open-source?
Yes. Fedora Commons Repository is licensed under Apache-2.0 and Filestash under AGPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Fedora Commons Repository and Filestash with Docker?
Fedora Commons Repository: check the project docs for container support. Filestash: yes.