ProjectSend 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?
FeatureProjectSendSeaweedFS
CategoryFile Sync & StorageFile Sync & Storage
LicenseGPL-2.0Apache-2.0
LanguagePHPGo
Setup difficultyEasyHard
Min. RAM256 MB512 MB
Deploymentdocker, bare-metaldocker, kubernetes, binary
GitHub stars★ 1,958★ 33,952
First released20122015
ReplacesDropbox, WeTransferAmazon S3

Why pick each one

Choose ProjectSend if…

  • Great for client deliverables
  • Simple to operate
  • Clear access control
ProjectSend 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 ProjectSend or SeaweedFS better?

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

Are ProjectSend and SeaweedFS free and open-source?

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

Can I run ProjectSend and SeaweedFS with Docker?

ProjectSend: yes. SeaweedFS: yes.

Related comparisons