Learn how SolidTime and TimeScribe 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
Version
License
Self-hosted
Repository

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

Both SolidTime and TimeScribe 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.
SolidTime significantly outpaces TimeScribe in community adoption with 8,943 stars compared to 910 stars on GitHub. This 9.8x difference suggests SolidTime has a much larger and more active community. In terms of developer contributions, SolidTime has 510 forks, indicating moderate developer engagement.
TimeScribe is growing faster, adding 20 stars in the last 30 days (+2.2%) against adding 54 stars for SolidTime (+0.6%). TimeScribe is the smaller project of the two, so it is closing the gap rather than extending a lead.
Both projects show recent activity, with SolidTime last updated 19 hours ago and TimeScribe 8 days ago.
Both tools share common technology foundations, being built with JavaScript, CSS, Typescript, Vue, PHP, Laravel. However, they differ in their additional technology choices: SolidTime uses Bash.
SolidTime has been in development longer, starting 3 years ago, compared to TimeScribe which began 2 years ago. This 1.0-year head start suggests SolidTime may have more mature features and established processes.
The projects use different licenses: SolidTime is licensed under AGPL-3.0 while TimeScribe uses GPL-3.0. Consider the licensing requirements when choosing for your project.
Both tools serve similar use cases in Time Tracking.
Both SolidTime and TimeScribe offer self-hosting capabilities, giving you full control over your data and infrastructure.