Himalaya vs meli
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?
Himalaya
Modern command-line email client written in Rust
VS
meli
Terminal email client with a modern interface
| Feature | Himalaya | meli |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Mail Servers | Mail Servers |
| License | MIT | GPL-3.0 |
| Language | Rust | Rust |
| Setup difficulty | Medium | Medium |
| Min. RAM | 64 MB | 64 MB |
| Deployment | binary, source | binary, source |
| GitHub stars | ★ 6,962 | ★ 877 |
| First released | 2021 | 2017 |
| Replaces | Mutt, Outlook | Mutt, NeoMutt |
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
Choose meli if…
- Released under the GPL-3.0 license
- Written in Rust
- Tiny footprint — runs in 64 MB RAM
Frequently asked questions
Is Himalaya or meli better?
Neither is universally better. Himalaya has the larger community; both share a medium setup difficulty, so the decision comes down to features and licensing.
Are Himalaya and meli free and open-source?
Yes. Himalaya is licensed under MIT and meli under GPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Himalaya and meli with Docker?
Himalaya: check the project docs for container support. meli: check the project docs for container support.