this post was submitted on 10 Jun 2026
37 points (95.1% liked)

Selfhosted

59973 readers
418 users here now

A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.

Rules:

  1. Be civil: we're here to support and learn from one another. Insults won't be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.

  2. No spam.

  3. Posts here are to be centered around self-hosting. Please ensure it is clear in your post how it relates to self-hosting.

  4. Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or git here. Just post the link for folks to click.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title.

  6. No trolling.

Resources:

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
ruud@lemmy.world
Loki@lemmy.world
CannaVet@lemmy.world
devve@lemmy.world
ayyy@sh.itjust.works
curbstickle@anarchist.nexus
curbstickle_lw@lemmy.world
37
Where is the love for conduit? Everybody is preferring continuwuity or tuwunel? (lemmy.world)
submitted 1 week ago by mobergmann@lemmy.world to c/selfhosted@lemmy.world
9 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

I only read about people using continuwuity and tuwunel, but apparently none are using conduit. When searching, I only find "hate" against conduit, but no actual reason why people prefer the fork, except some ominous comments stating that it is practically unmaintained (which is not true). I found that conduit has the majority of features implemented, except minor things like threads (which is still WIP, to be fair) and presence. Also, it is rock solid, only using minimal resources. It may be slow in development, taking a bit longer to implement a new feature, but not too much longer. Or am I missing something the others have to offer?

If you are running a conduit fork, what is your reason for leaving conduit, and if you are running conduit, why didn't you switch?

If it is not obvious: I mean compared to conduit and its forks, not synapse, ....

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] litchralee@sh.itjust.works 21 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

some ominous comments stating that it is practically unmaintained (which is not true)

Objectively, I can see that the last commit to the default branch was in March 2026, and that the 10th newest commit was back in September 2025. Of these 10, 3 are new features and 6 are fixes and 1 is documentation. I also see in the issue tracker that no project developer replied to the two newest reports, which were reported 2 weeks and 2 months ago.

As a subjective opinion, the explanation that Conduit is essentially rock-solid and this doesn't need much upkeep or commits, that is just not credible. The Git history shows fixes and new features, but at a rate that averages just one commit per month. And some of those commits are literally one-line changes.

But let's suppose that the maintainers are uninterested in small UI or quality-of-life features, and only make changes when it crosses their threshold for what is "important" enough. That's a choice, sure, but let's see if that holds water. Here is the project's response to an issue opened in January, with the response being in February that confirms a logic bug and schedules it for the next release.

That was three months ago. No updates. No mentioned branches or PRs or merges. All while this bug remains in place. And that's understandable for FOSS project developers, for whom the project is not their day job.

But in any circumstances, the totality of the evidence does not inspire confidence, let alone a determination that Conduit is "rock solid". And that's even before looking at the code.

TL;DR: the premise of the question is wrong. Conduit is not maintained.