What is the main difference between Donetick and Super Productivity?

Donetick and Super Productivity are both task management tools but differ in their approach, features, and target audience. Compare their GitHub stats, technology stack, and community adoption to make the best choice.

Which is better: Donetick or Super Productivity?

The choice between Donetick and Super Productivity depends on your specific needs, technical requirements, and team preferences. Both are quality open source solutions with active communities.

Can I migrate from Donetick to Super Productivity?

Migration between Donetick and Super Productivity is possible but requires careful planning. Consider data export/import capabilities, feature parity, and potential workflow changes.

Sent – Messaging Infrastructure for Developers. One API for SMS, WhatsApp, and RCS across 190+ countries.

Learn more

Donetick vs Super Productivity

Learn how Donetick and Super Productivity differ in their key features, development activity, technology stack and community adoption, so you can decide which of these task management tools is best for you.

Donetick

Organize tasks and chores with intelligent scheduling, fair assignment, and collaboration features. Perfect for families and teams with smart notifications.

Visit Donetick Read more

2,741stars+97(+3.7%)

Last 30 days

Last commit
2 days ago
Repository age
2 years
Version
v0.1.86
License
AGPL-3.0
Self-hosted
Yes
Repository
donetick/donetick

Super Productivity

Privacy-first task manager combining task lists, Kanban, Pomodoro timers, time tracking, and integrations with GitHub, GitLab, and Jira. No account required, works offline.

Visit Super Productivity Read more

23,643stars+806(+3.5%)

Last 30 days

Last commit
15 hours ago
Repository age
10 years
Version
v20.0.0
License
MIT
Repository
super-productivity

Detailed Comparison

Super Productivity appears to have several advantages over Donetick, particularly in popularity, maturity and licensing. Consider your specific needs regarding popularity, growth, activity, technology, maturity, licensing and features when making your decision.

Super Productivity wins

Community & Popularity

Super Productivity significantly outpaces Donetick in community adoption with 23,643 stars compared to 2,741 stars on GitHub. This 8.6x difference suggests Super Productivity has a much larger and more active community. In terms of developer contributions, Super Productivity has 2,290 forks, indicating strong developer engagement.

Comparable

Growth Momentum

Donetick and Super Productivity are moving at much the same rate, adding 97 stars and adding 806 stars respectively over the last 30 days (+3.7% vs +3.5%). Neither is pulling away from the other on momentum alone.

Comparable

Development Activity

Both projects show recent activity, with Donetick last updated 2 days ago and Super Productivity 15 hours ago.

Comparable

Technology Stack

Both tools share common technology foundations, being built with Bash. However, they differ in their additional technology choices: Donetick uses Golang while Super Productivity leverages JavaScript, CSS, Typescript, JSX, SCSS, Objective-C, Java, Swift, Ruby, Kotlin, MATLAB.

Super Productivity wins

Project Maturity

Super Productivity has been in development longer, starting 10 years ago, compared to Donetick which began 2 years ago. This 7.6-year head start suggests Super Productivity may have more mature features and established processes.

Super Productivity wins

Licensing

Super Productivity uses the MIT license, which is more permissive than Donetick's AGPL-3.0 license, potentially offering greater flexibility for commercial use and integration.

Comparable

Use Cases & Features

Both tools serve similar use cases in Task Management. However, they also have distinct specializations: Super Productivity extends into Time Tracking.

Donetick wins

Hosting & Deployment

Donetick provides self-hosting options for complete data control and customization, while Super Productivity may be primarily cloud-based or require different deployment approaches.