Learn how TimeScribe 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
Version
License
Self-hosted
Repository

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

TimeScribe appears to have several advantages over Ziit, particularly in popularity, growth and activity. Consider your specific needs regarding popularity, growth, activity, technology, maturity, licensing and features when making your decision.
TimeScribe significantly outpaces Ziit in community adoption with 910 stars compared to 254 stars on GitHub. This 3.6x difference suggests TimeScribe has a much larger and more active community. In terms of developer contributions, TimeScribe has 87 forks, indicating growing developer engagement.
TimeScribe is growing faster, adding 20 stars in the last 30 days (+2.2%) against adding 3 stars for Ziit (+1.2%). TimeScribe is both larger and pulling further ahead.
TimeScribe shows more recent development activity with its last commit 8 days ago, while Ziit was last updated 1 month ago. This suggests TimeScribe is being more actively maintained.
Both tools share common technology foundations, being built with Typescript, Vue. However, they differ in their additional technology choices: TimeScribe uses JavaScript, CSS, PHP, Laravel while Ziit leverages SCSS, Nuxt.js.
Both projects started around the same time, with TimeScribe beginning 2 years ago and Ziit 1 year ago.
The projects use different licenses: TimeScribe is licensed under GPL-3.0 while Ziit uses AGPL-3.0. Consider the licensing requirements when choosing for your project.
Both tools serve similar use cases in Time Tracking.
Both TimeScribe and Ziit offer self-hosting capabilities, giving you full control over your data and infrastructure.