Twelve repositories for writing code, keeping notes and letting people in

Another terminal coding agent, far more popular at 127,393 stars, but built by one model provider around its own models rather than being neutral between them.

The same idea from Google, at 107,165 stars, with a generous free tier and the same single-provider limit.

Covered in Edition 25. It commits each change to git as it goes, which makes undoing one step easier, but its last code landed in May 2026 rather than this week.

A fork of the same lineage at 24,300 stars, with more switchable modes for different jobs, but its last code landed in May 2026.

36,054 stars and the same editor-panel shape, more focused on code completion as you type and less on running commands.

Covered in Edition 29. It runs on the machine rather than inside an editor, and it is now maintained under the Linux Foundation.

The first choice in this field at 102,354 stars, with far more documentation and far more third-party help, and a heavier dependency list.

The small foundation that FastAPI is built on, at 12,592 stars. It does less on purpose, so you assemble more yourself.

18,639 stars and an older answer to the same speed question, with its own server built in rather than relying on a separate one.

3,285 stars and the closest match of all: the same kind of language server for the same kind of notes, written in F#, but its last code landed in February 2026.

Covered in Edition 29. It is a command-line tool rather than an editor service, so it searches and creates notes from a shell instead of completing names as you type.

Covered in Edition 33. The opposite trade: a whole web application over the same Markdown files, which you run as a service rather than inside an editor.

10,828 stars and one downloaded file. It serves and receives files over HTTP and WebDAV with access control, and it does one folder rather than many remote storage systems.

12,612 stars. It is a server rather than a client: it offers SFTP, FTP and WebDAV to other people, with cloud storage behind it, and its web page is for administration rather than browsing.

Covered in Edition 36. The same long list of storage systems, as a command-line copy tool, so it is better for moving files in bulk and has no browser interface.

Covered in Edition 37, 640 stars, and its own licence file credits code taken from Picard. It shows files as a spreadsheet grid for bulk hand-editing, and it does not identify the recordings itself. Linux only.

Covered in Edition 36, 15,560 stars. The same MusicBrainz matching from a command line, built around importing and organising a whole library rather than editing files one by one.

1,966 stars, and Picard's own dependency. It is the Python library that reads and writes the tags, with no interface and no matching, for anyone who wants to script this themselves.

15,838 stars, a PHP application with more features and more settings, and it will run on ordinary shared web hosting where this one will not.

3,920 stars and one downloaded file with the database inside it, so it is far easier to start and does not scale to many readers.

Covered in Edition 28. It solves the other half of the problem by making a feed for a site that removed its own, then you read it in something like this.

37,100 stars and far larger. It is a complete identity system you host, so it can replace your logins entirely rather than translating someone else's, and it is a much bigger thing to run.

17,495 stars, from the same company. It issues OAuth 2.0 and OpenID Connect tokens and expects you to supply the user management, which is the opposite half of the job.

Covered in Edition 32. It puts one login and a second factor in front of services you run, which is about protecting your own things rather than accepting a customer's company login.

23,223 stars, the same API-first idea in Python with GraphQL, more mature in some areas and a heavier thing to run.

8,332 stars and the closest match in shape and language, and it has been renamed from vendure-ecommerce/vendure.

15,686 stars and the oldest of the four, built in Ruby on Rails, which is the better fit if that is the language your team already knows.

21,847 stars and the closest match, built on PostgreSQL only, with a newer interface and a smaller plugin ecosystem.

15,627 stars, the same idea with a stronger emphasis on building small applications on top of the tables.

Covered in Edition 34. It also wraps an existing database, but it is aimed at developers and content teams rather than at spreadsheet users, and its licence is a different and stricter arrangement.

Covered in Edition 22, 6,288 stars. A full editor inside the terminal with panes and a results grid, which is more to learn and much better for long queries.

Covered in Edition 8, 2,131 stars. The other half of the job: it builds and reshapes SQLite files from the command line rather than querying them interactively.

13,412 stars, the same tool for PostgreSQL from the same group, so what you learn in one carries straight over.

Covered in Edition 33, 2,845 stars. The same job with a different layout, and its last code landed in February 2026 rather than last week.

20,644 stars and much more popular. It is a viewer you move through with arrow keys first and a filter tool second, so it suits looking at JSON more than writing a filter.

3,678 stars. Not interactive at all: it is a faster and stricter replacement for jq itself, which is what you reach for once the filter is written.