Learn how Ever Teams and Kanba differ in their key features, development activity, technology stack and community adoption, so you can decide which of these project management suites is best for you.
Last 30 days
Last commit
19 hours agoRepository age
4 yearsVersion
v0.146.57License
AGPL-3.0Repository
ever-co/ever-teams
Last 30 days
Last commit
3 months agoRepository age
1 yearVersion
1.0.8License
MITRepository
uaghazade1/kanba
Ever Teams appears to have several advantages over Kanba, particularly in growth, activity and maturity. Consider your specific needs regarding popularity, growth, activity, technology, maturity, licensing and features when making your decision.
Both Ever Teams and Kanba show comparable community engagement with 601 and 661 stars respectively. In terms of developer contributions, Kanba has 116 forks, indicating moderate developer engagement.
Ever Teams is growing faster, adding 14 stars in the last 30 days (+2.4%) against adding 3 stars for Kanba (+0.5%). Ever Teams is the smaller project of the two, so it is closing the gap rather than extending a lead.
Ever Teams shows more recent development activity with its last commit 19 hours ago, while Kanba was last updated 3 months ago. This suggests Ever Teams is being more actively maintained.
Both tools share common technology foundations, being built with JavaScript, CSS, Typescript, JSX, Next.js. However, they differ in their additional technology choices: Ever Teams uses Bash.
Ever Teams has been in development longer, starting 4 years ago, compared to Kanba which began 1 year ago. This 2.7-year head start suggests Ever Teams may have more mature features and established processes.
Kanba uses the MIT license, which is more permissive than Ever Teams's AGPL-3.0 license, potentially offering greater flexibility for commercial use and integration.
Both tools serve similar use cases in Project Management Suites. However, they also have distinct specializations: Ever Teams also focuses on Collaborative Workspaces, Time Tracking.
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs