Learn how Hackatime and Ziit differ in their key features, development activity, technology stack and community adoption, so you can decide which of these time tracking tools is best for you.
Last 30 days
Last commit
Repository age
License
Self-hosted
Repository

Last 30 days
Last commit
Repository age
Version
License
Self-hosted
Repository

Hackatime appears to have several advantages over Ziit, particularly in growth, activity and licensing. Consider your specific needs regarding popularity, growth, activity, technology, maturity, licensing and features when making your decision.
Both tools have similar popularity levels, with Hackatime having 183 stars and Ziit having 249 stars on GitHub. In terms of developer contributions, Hackatime has 157 forks, indicating moderate developer engagement.
Hackatime is growing faster, adding 25 stars in the last 30 days (+16%) against adding 6 stars for Ziit (+2.5%). Hackatime is the smaller project of the two, so it is closing the gap rather than extending a lead.
Hackatime shows more recent development activity with its last commit 7 hours ago, while Ziit was last updated 2 months ago. This suggests Hackatime is being more actively maintained.
Both tools share common technology foundations, being built with Typescript. However, they differ in their additional technology choices: Hackatime uses JavaScript, CSS, Bash, Ruby while Ziit leverages SCSS, Vue, Nuxt.js.
Both projects started around the same time, with Hackatime beginning 2 years ago and Ziit 1 year ago.
Hackatime uses the MIT license, which is more permissive than Ziit's AGPL-3.0 license, potentially offering greater flexibility for commercial use and integration.
Both tools serve similar use cases in Time Tracking. However, they also have distinct specializations: Ziit extends into Productivity & Utilities.
Both Hackatime and Ziit offer self-hosting capabilities, giving you full control over your data and infrastructure.