Fossil vs Apache Allura
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?
Fossil
Distributed version control with built-in wiki and bug tracking
VS
Apache Allura
Open-source forge for managing source code and projects
| Feature | Fossil | Apache Allura |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Developer Tools & Git | Git Hosting & Forges |
| License | BSD-2-Clause | Apache-2.0 |
| Language | C | Python |
| Setup difficulty | Easy | Hard |
| Min. RAM | 64 MB | 2,048 MB |
| Deployment | binary, bare-metal | docker, bare-metal, source |
| GitHub stars | ★ 600 | ★ 148 |
| First released | 2006 | 2012 |
| Replaces | GitHub, Git | GitHub, SourceForge |
Why pick each one
Choose Fossil if…
- Released under the BSD-2-Clause license
- Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
- Written in C
- Tiny footprint — runs in 64 MB RAM
Choose Apache Allura if…
- Released under the Apache-2.0 license
- First-class Docker support for quick deployment
- Written in Python
Frequently asked questions
Is Fossil or Apache Allura better?
Fossil is the stronger all-round pick: it has both the larger community and the simpler easy setup. Consider Apache Allura if its specific feature set fits your needs better.
Are Fossil and Apache Allura free and open-source?
Yes. Fossil is licensed under BSD-2-Clause and Apache Allura under Apache-2.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Fossil and Apache Allura with Docker?
Fossil: check the project docs for container support. Apache Allura: yes.