Damselfly Web vs Tube Archivist
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted apps from related categories — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Not the right match-up?
Damselfly Web
Server-based digital asset manager for large photo libraries
VS
Tube Archivist
Self-hosted YouTube media server with metadata and search
| Feature | Damselfly Web | Tube Archivist |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Photo Management | Media Servers |
| License | AGPL-3.0 | GPL-3.0 |
| Language | Python | Python |
| Setup difficulty | Hard | Medium |
| Min. RAM | 1,024 MB | 2,048 MB |
| Deployment | docker, bare-metal | docker |
| GitHub stars | ★ 700 | ★ 8,342 |
| First released | 2011 | 2021 |
| Replaces | Flickr, YouTube | YouTube |
Why pick each one
Frequently asked questions
Is Damselfly Web or Tube Archivist better?
Tube Archivist is the stronger all-round pick: it has both the larger community and the simpler medium setup. Consider Damselfly Web if its specific feature set fits your needs better.
Are Damselfly Web and Tube Archivist free and open-source?
Yes. Damselfly Web is licensed under AGPL-3.0 and Tube Archivist under GPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Damselfly Web and Tube Archivist with Docker?
Damselfly Web: yes. Tube Archivist: yes.