CKAN vs Papra
Both are self-hosted archiving and digital preservation (dp) projects. This page compares how well each one is actually maintained — the part you cannot see from a feature list.
| CKAN | Papra | |
|---|---|---|
| Health score | 81/100 | 83/100 |
| Commits (11 mo) | 857 | 685 |
| Commits (last 3 mo) | 269 | 218 |
| Stars | 5.1k | 5.5k |
| Latest release | 26 Aug 2026 | 1 Sept 2026 |
| Licence | AGPL-3.0 | AGPL-3.0 |
| Built with | Python | Docker |
| Typical RAM | 1 GB | 1 GB |
CKAN
Make open data websites.
Actively maintained with regular releases.
Commit activity more than 77% of tracked projects; popularity more than 67%. How this is calculated.
Commits, last 11 months
Papra
Minimalist document storage, management and archiving platform designed to be simple to use and accessible to everyone.
High commit volume, frequent releases and growing activity.
Commit activity more than 72% of tracked projects; popularity more than 68%. How this is calculated.
Commits, last 11 months
How to read this
Everything above is measured, not opinion: commit counts and release dates come from the public repositories, and the health score ranks each project against all 1352 projects we track. Read the full method.
What this comparison deliberately does not do is tell you which has the better feature set. Maintenance health tells you which project will still be receiving security fixes in two years. Decide that first, then compare features on the projects that survive the filter.
See every option in this category: self-hosted archiving and digital preservation (dp).