Learn how ClearFlask and Quackback differ in their key features, development activity, technology stack and community adoption, so you can decide which of these feedback & feature request management tools is best for you.
Last 30 days
Last commit
11 hours agoRepository age
5 yearsVersion
2.7.0License
Apache-2.0Self-hosted
YesRepository
clearflask
Last 30 days

Both ClearFlask and Quackback have their unique strengths and serve similar purposes effectively. Consider your specific needs regarding popularity, growth, activity, maturity, licensing and features when making your decision.
Both tools have similar popularity levels, with ClearFlask having 450 stars and Quackback having 330 stars on GitHub. In terms of developer contributions, Quackback has 110 forks, indicating moderate developer engagement.
Quackback is growing faster, adding 37 stars in the last 30 days (+13%) against losing 1 stars for ClearFlask (-0.2%). Quackback is the smaller project of the two, so it is closing the gap rather than extending a lead.
Both projects show recent activity, with ClearFlask last updated 11 hours ago and Quackback 4 days ago.
ClearFlask has been in development longer, starting 5 years ago, compared to Quackback which began 11 months ago. This 4.4-year head start suggests ClearFlask may have more mature features and established processes.
The projects use different licenses: ClearFlask is licensed under Apache-2.0 while Quackback uses AGPL-3.0. Consider the licensing requirements when choosing for your project.
Both tools serve similar use cases in Feedback & Feature Request Management.
Both ClearFlask and Quackback offer self-hosting capabilities, giving you full control over your data and infrastructure.