SRS vs Tube Archivist
Both are self-hosted media streaming - video streaming projects. This page compares how well each one is actually maintained — the part you cannot see from a feature list.
| SRS | Tube Archivist | |
|---|---|---|
| Health score | 74/100 | 70/100 |
| Commits (11 mo) | 159 | 219 |
| Commits (last 3 mo) | 31 | 35 |
| Stars | 29k | 8.5k |
| Latest release | 24 Sept 2026 | 25 Aug 2026 |
| Licence | MIT | GPL-3.0 |
| Built with | Docker, C++ | Docker |
| Typical RAM | 2 GB | 1 GB |
SRS
A simple, high efficiency and real-time video server, supports RTMP, WebRTC, HLS, HTTP-FLV and SRT.
Actively maintained with regular releases.
Commit activity more than 38% of tracked projects; popularity more than 92%. How this is calculated.
Commits, last 11 months
Tube Archivist
Organize, search, and enjoy your YouTube collection. Subscribe, download, and track viewed content with metadata indexing and a user-friendly interface.
Actively maintained with regular releases.
Commit activity more than 45% of tracked projects; popularity more than 76%. 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 streaming - video streaming.