Wallabag VS tubearchivist

Wallabag[0] is useful too if you want a self-hosted bookmarking solution. I'm with Pinboard too, but regularly export my bookmarks so I have a backed up local copy of recent bookmarks I've added to Pinboard.

[0] https://github.com/wallabag/wallabag

[0] https://wallabag.org/

https://github.com/wallabag/wallabag

No one has mentioned wallabag yet, so wanted to. Been working well for me - has apps and extensions. If you’re not excited to self-host - https://www.wallabag.it/en has been flawless with the exorbitant price of… 11 euro a year.

Self hosted Wallabag is the way https://wallabag.org/

wallabag is a versatile self-hosted application designed to effortlessly save and organize web pages, keeping online content organized and readily accessible. With its intuitive GUI, users can conveniently store and categorize articles, allowing for easy retrieval whenever you're ready to read later on. Kalc_DK recommends it "for managing links/content that goes into your knowledge base."

That's been logged as an issue in Wallabag, from back in 2016. So I wouldn't hold my breathe on this being implemented anytime soon. https://github.com/wallabag/wallabag/issues/2149

Readwise is absolutely high end power user software, and not just a "read it later" service. If you need it's features, it's worth it. I really like all of my highlights syncing to my obsidian notes, the ability to use a single source for rss/epubs/webpages/pdf/etc and having an AI assistant to throw at tasks.

If you want a free, more direct pocket clone, check out wallabag: https://github.com/wallabag/wallabag

Try Wallabag https://github.com/wallabag/wallabag

You could try wallabag

holy hell I hadn't come across archivebox as of yet, I'll definitely be spinning this up this eve. Is the UI comfortable enough to use as a "bookmark manager"? just been setting up tubearchivist for essentially this purpose, wondering if ArchiveBox would essentially do the same

I'm using TubeArchivist to maintain this VERY large collection.

There appears to be a patch in Tubearchivest at https://github.com/tubearchivist/tubearchivist/issues/587

Personally, I use Tubearchivist.

There are others though.

https://github.com/tubearchivist/tubearchivist

I've been seeing TubeArchivist posted a lot recently.

It has been some time since the last release, but v0.4.0 is finally wrapped up. This brings a wide range of fixes and changes, particularly stability improvements, with our new file system naming convention, this should solve a bunch of previously unsolvable compatibility issues. I highly recommend reading the release notes carefully, as the filesystem migration could be a breaking change if you made changes manually there: https://github.com/tubearchivist/tubearchivist/releases/tag/v0.4.0

I saw this was a Django app so I dug around to look at their models. As far as I can tell this is all they have: https://github.com/tubearchivist/tubearchivist/blob/master/t... - just a `Account` model.

It looks like Django + SQLite is used for user accounts, but all other data storage happens in Elasticsearch.

It's an interesting design decision. I would have gone all-in on the database, and used SQLite FTS in place of Elasticsearch for simplicity, but that's my own personal favourite stack. Not saying their design is bad, just different.

Oh, so it is. I happen to run a TubeArchivist at home that grabs the videos and subtitles. Then I can search through the subtitle files for key phrases. I must have grabbed it while it was still public.

You probably want Tube Archivist. The only problem is that it’s naming convention doesn’t work with the Jellyfin YouTube Metadata Plugin.