SchildiChat vs Session
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?
SchildiChat
Element-based Matrix client with extra usability tweaks
VS
Session
Onion-routed private messenger with no phone number
| Feature | SchildiChat | Session |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Matrix & XMPP | Chat & Communication |
| License | AGPL-3.0 | GPL-3.0 |
| Language | Shell | TypeScript |
| Setup difficulty | Easy | Medium |
| Min. RAM | 128 MB | 256 MB |
| Deployment | docker, bare-metal, source | bare-metal, binary, source |
| GitHub stars | ★ 465 | ★ 546 |
| First released | 2020 | 2020 |
| Replaces | Slack, WhatsApp | Signal, WhatsApp, Telegram |
Why pick each one
Choose SchildiChat if…
- Released under the AGPL-3.0 license
- Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
- First-class Docker support for quick deployment
- Written in Shell
Choose Session if…
- Released under the GPL-3.0 license
- Written in TypeScript
- Tiny footprint — runs in 256 MB RAM
Frequently asked questions
Is SchildiChat or Session better?
Neither is universally better. Session has the larger community, while SchildiChat is simpler to set up (easy difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.
Are SchildiChat and Session free and open-source?
Yes. SchildiChat is licensed under AGPL-3.0 and Session under GPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run SchildiChat and Session with Docker?
SchildiChat: yes. Session: check the project docs for container support.