Open Web Calendar vs SeaweedFS

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?
FeatureOpen Web CalendarSeaweedFS
CategoryFile Sync & StorageFile Sync & Storage
LicenseGPL-2.0Apache-2.0
LanguagePythonGo
Setup difficultyEasyHard
Min. RAM50 MB512 MB
Deploymentbare-metaldocker, kubernetes, binary
GitHub stars★ 330★ 33,952
First released20242015
ReplacesGoogle Agenda, Microsoft OutlookAmazon S3

Why pick each one

Choose Open Web Calendar if…

  • Released under the GPL-2.0 license
  • Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
  • Written in Python
  • Tiny footprint — runs in 50 MB RAM
Open Web Calendar details

Choose SeaweedFS if…

  • Released under the Apache-2.0 license
  • First-class Docker support for quick deployment
  • Kubernetes-ready with Helm charts available
  • Mature project with 34k GitHub stars
SeaweedFS details

Frequently asked questions

Is Open Web Calendar or SeaweedFS better?

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

Are Open Web Calendar and SeaweedFS free and open-source?

Yes. Open Web Calendar is licensed under GPL-2.0 and SeaweedFS under Apache-2.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.

Can I run Open Web Calendar and SeaweedFS with Docker?

Open Web Calendar: check the project docs for container support. SeaweedFS: yes.

Related comparisons