Tracks vs Todoman Web
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted project management & tasks options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Not the right match-up?
Tracks
GTD-style to-do list and personal organizer
VS
Todoman Web
CalDAV-based task and to-do management you can self-host
| Feature | Tracks | Todoman Web |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Project Management & Tasks | Project Management & Tasks |
| License | GPL-2.0 | ISC |
| Language | Ruby | Python |
| Setup difficulty | Medium | Medium |
| Min. RAM | 256 MB | 64 MB |
| Deployment | docker, bare-metal, source | bare-metal, binary |
| GitHub stars | ★ 1,238 | ★ 588 |
| First released | 2004 | 2015 |
| Replaces | Todoist, OmniFocus | Todoist, Microsoft To Do |
Why pick each one
Choose Tracks if…
- Released under the GPL-2.0 license
- First-class Docker support for quick deployment
- Active community (1.2k GitHub stars)
- Written in Ruby
Frequently asked questions
Is Tracks or Todoman Web better?
Neither is universally better. Tracks has the larger community; both share a medium setup difficulty, so the decision comes down to features and licensing.
Are Tracks and Todoman Web free and open-source?
Yes. Tracks is licensed under GPL-2.0 and Todoman Web under ISC. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Tracks and Todoman Web with Docker?
Tracks: yes. Todoman Web: check the project docs for container support.