gohttpserver vs Puter

A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted file sync & storage options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.

Not the right match-up?
FeaturegohttpserverPuter
CategoryFile Sync & StorageFile Sync & Storage
LicenseMITAGPL-3.0
LanguageJavaScriptTypeScript
Setup difficultyEasyMedium
Min. RAM32 MB512 MB
Deploymentdocker, binarydocker
GitHub stars★ 2,843★ 43,003
First released20162026
ReplacesDropbox

Why pick each one

Choose gohttpserver if…

  • Released under the MIT license
  • Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
  • First-class Docker support for quick deployment
  • Active community (2.8k GitHub stars)
gohttpserver details

Choose Puter if…

  • Released under the AGPL-3.0 license
  • First-class Docker support for quick deployment
  • Mature project with 43k GitHub stars
  • Written in TypeScript
Puter details

Frequently asked questions

Is gohttpserver or Puter better?

Neither is universally better. Puter has the larger community, while gohttpserver is simpler to set up (easy difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.

Are gohttpserver and Puter free and open-source?

Yes. gohttpserver is licensed under MIT and Puter under AGPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.

Can I run gohttpserver and Puter with Docker?

gohttpserver: yes. Puter: yes.

Related comparisons