How We Evaluate Open-Source Tools

Directories are only useful if you trust their judgment. Here's the checklist behind every tool on BetterOpenSource.

What we check

1. License clarity. Is it genuinely open source, source-available, or fair-code? We label it honestly — a permissive MIT license is very different from AGPL or BSL.
2. Project health. Recent commits, contributor count, and release cadence. A tool with no activity in a year is a risk, not a recommendation.
3. Self-hostability. Can you actually run it yourself, and how hard is it?
4. Real-world fit. What proprietary tool does it credibly replace, and where does it fall short?

What we deliberately include

• Cons, not just pros. Every listing names the trade-offs.
• The proprietary comparison. You came here to replace something specific.
• Installation reality. A one-line Docker command or an honest "this takes effort."

What we don't do

• We don't rank by who pays us — listings aren't sponsored.
• We don't hide license caveats to make a tool look friendlier.
• We don't pretend self-hosting is free of maintenance.

Spotted something out of date or missing? Use the feedback button in the corner — it opens an issue on our GitHub directly. Community corrections keep the directory honest.