Huly vs Octobox
| Tagline | All-in-one project management, tracker, and team collaboration - a Linear/Jira alternative | Take back control of your GitHub notifications with a self-hosted inbox |
| Category | Project Management & Kanban | Project Management & Kanban |
| Replaces | Linear, Jira, Slack | Jira, Linear, Asana |
| GitHub stars | 26k | 4.5k |
| Language | TypeScript | Ruby |
| License | EPL-2.0 | AGPL-3.0 |
| Self-host difficulty | 4/5 Involved | 3/5 Moderate |
| Deploy options | Docker Docker Compose Kubernetes Manual | Docker Docker Compose Manual |
| Managed hosting | ||
| Last updated | today | 2 days ago |
| View repo | View repo |
Where each falls short
The honest trade-offs — what you give up with each, versus the proprietary tools they replace.
Huly
- Self-hosting the full multi-service architecture (MongoDB, MinIO, Elastic, transactors) is complex
- Documentation for self-hosting is sparse relative to its breadth
- Breadth over depth: individual modules are less mature than dedicated tools like Linear or Slack
- Self-hosted edition trails the managed cloud on some features
Octobox
- Scoped exclusively to GitHub notifications; no GitLab or Bitbucket support
- Not a full project management tool — no task creation, boards, or planning views
- Requires a GitHub OAuth app setup; adding team members requires individual GitHub auth
- Development activity has slowed; some GitHub API changes may not be promptly reflected
Bottom line
Choose Octobox if you want the lower-effort setup; choose Huly for the larger community and ecosystem. Huly has seen more recent development. Open each guide below for deploy steps and the full feature gap.
Huly
All-in-one project management, tracker, and team collaboration - a Linear/Jira alternative