Learn how Huly and Wekan 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
Repository age
Version
License
Self-hosted
Repository

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

Both Huly and Wekan have their unique strengths and serve similar purposes effectively. Consider your specific needs regarding popularity, growth, activity, technology, maturity, licensing and features when making your decision.
Both tools have similar popularity levels, with Huly having 27,775 stars and Wekan having 21,093 stars on GitHub. In terms of developer contributions, Wekan has 3,000 forks, indicating strong developer engagement.
Huly is growing faster, adding 312 stars in the last 30 days (+1.1%) against adding 27 stars for Wekan (+0.1%). Huly is both larger and pulling further ahead.
Both projects show recent activity, with Huly last updated 4 hours ago and Wekan 44 minutes ago.
Both tools share common technology foundations, being built with JavaScript, Bash, Python, SCSS. However, they differ in their additional technology choices: Huly uses Typescript while Wekan leverages CSS, PHP, Perl, Meteor.
Wekan has been in development longer, starting 13 years ago, compared to Huly which began 5 years ago. This 7.6-year head start suggests Wekan may have more mature features and established processes.
Wekan uses the MIT license, which is more permissive than Huly's EPL-2.0 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: Huly also focuses on Collaborative Workspaces, Video Conferencing & Virtual Office.
Both Huly and Wekan offer self-hosting capabilities, giving you full control over your data and infrastructure.
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