Learn how Humla and Minutes differ in their key features, development activity, technology stack and community adoption, so you can decide which of these meeting transcription & notetakers is best for you.
Last 30 days

Last 30 days
Last commit
3 days agoRepository age
8 monthsVersion
v0.33.2License
MITRepository
silverstein/minutes
Both Humla and Minutes 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.
Minutes significantly outpaces Humla in community adoption with 1,605 stars compared to 349 stars on GitHub. This 4.6x difference suggests Minutes has a much larger and more active community. In terms of developer contributions, Minutes has 185 forks, indicating moderate developer engagement.
Humla is growing faster, adding 36 stars in the last 30 days (+12%) against adding 49 stars for Minutes (+3.1%). Humla is the smaller project of the two, so it is closing the gap rather than extending a lead.
Both projects show recent activity, with Humla last updated 12 hours ago and Minutes 3 days ago.
Both projects started around the same time, with Humla beginning 7 months ago and Minutes 8 months ago.
Both projects use the MIT license, providing identical terms for usage and distribution.
Both tools serve similar use cases in Meeting Transcription & Notetakers.
Humla provides self-hosting options for complete data control and customization, while Minutes may be primarily cloud-based or require different deployment approaches.