MeTube vs tubesync

Both are self-hosted media management projects. This page compares how well each one is actually maintained — the part you cannot see from a feature list.

MeTube and tubesync are closely matched on maintenance health (77 vs 78). Neither is the safer bet on activity alone, so choose on features, licence and the stack you already run.

	MeTube	tubesync
Health score	77/100	78/100
Commits (11 mo)	283	571
Commits (last 3 mo)	115	211
Stars	15k	2.8k
Latest release	27 Sept 2026	4 Sept 2026
Licence	AGPL-3.0	AGPL-3.0
Built with	Python, Nodejs, Docker	Docker, Python
Typical RAM	1 GB	1 GB

MeTube

Web GUI for youtube-dl, with playlist support. Allows downloading videos from dozens of websites.

77/100

Healthy

Actively maintained with regular releases.

Maintenance 20/40

Releases 25/25

Community 17/20

Momentum 15/15

Commit activity more than 51% of tracked projects; popularity more than 84%. How this is calculated.

Commits, last 11 months

tubesync

Syncs YouTube channels and playlists to a locally hosted media server.

78/100

Healthy

Actively maintained with regular releases.

Maintenance 27/40

Releases 25/25

Community 11/20

Momentum 15/15

Commit activity more than 67% of tracked projects; popularity more than 56%. 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 media management.