waka-box

Pros of waka-readme-stats

• More comprehensive statistics, including language breakdown and total coding time
• Customizable display options for different metrics and layouts
• Supports multiple version control platforms (GitHub, GitLab, Bitbucket)

Cons of waka-readme-stats

• More complex setup process compared to waka-box
• Requires more configuration to achieve desired output
• May provide too much information for users seeking a simpler display

Code Comparison

waka-box:

- uses: matchai/waka-box@master
  env:
    GH_TOKEN: ${{ secrets.GH_TOKEN }}
    GIST_ID: <your-gist-id>
    WAKATIME_API_KEY: ${{ secrets.WAKATIME_API_KEY }}

waka-readme-stats:

- uses: anmol098/waka-readme-stats@master
  with:
    WAKATIME_API_KEY: ${{ secrets.WAKATIME_API_KEY }}
    GH_TOKEN: ${{ secrets.GH_TOKEN }}
    SHOW_OS: "True"
    SHOW_PROJECTS: "True"
    SHOW_EDITORS: "True"

Summary

waka-readme-stats offers more detailed and customizable statistics, making it suitable for users who want comprehensive insights into their coding habits. However, this comes at the cost of a more complex setup and potentially overwhelming information. waka-box, on the other hand, provides a simpler solution with a more straightforward setup process, making it ideal for users who prefer a quick and easy way to display basic coding statistics on their GitHub profile.

Pros of waka-readme

• More customizable, allowing users to modify the layout and content of the displayed stats
• Supports multiple programming languages and environments
• Can be integrated directly into the user's GitHub README

Cons of waka-readme

• Requires more setup and configuration compared to waka-box
• May have a steeper learning curve for users new to GitHub Actions

Code Comparison

waka-box:

- uses: matchai/waka-box@master
  env:
    GH_TOKEN: ${{ secrets.GH_TOKEN }}
    GIST_ID: ${{ secrets.GIST_ID }}
    WAKATIME_API_KEY: ${{ secrets.WAKATIME_API_KEY }}

waka-readme:

- uses: athul/waka-readme@master
  with:
    WAKATIME_API_KEY: ${{ secrets.WAKATIME_API_KEY }}
    SHOW_TITLE: true
    BLOCKS: ->
    TIME_RANGE: all_time
    SHOW_TIME: true
    SHOW_MASKED_TIME: true

The code comparison shows that waka-readme offers more configuration options within the GitHub Actions workflow, allowing for greater customization of the displayed statistics. waka-box, on the other hand, has a simpler setup but provides less flexibility in terms of output customization.

Pros of wakapi

• Self-hosted solution, offering more control over data and privacy
• Supports multiple programming languages and IDEs
• Provides a web interface for viewing statistics

Cons of wakapi

• Requires more setup and maintenance compared to waka-box
• May have higher resource requirements for hosting

Code Comparison

waka-box:

- uses: matchai/waka-box@master
  env:
    GH_TOKEN: ${{ secrets.GH_TOKEN }}
    WAKATIME_API_KEY: ${{ secrets.WAKATIME_API_KEY }}

wakapi:

- name: wakapi
  uses: muety/wakapi@latest
  with:
    api-key: ${{ secrets.WAKAPI_API_KEY }}
    api-url: https://wakapi.dev/api

Key Differences

• waka-box is a GitHub Action that updates a gist with WakaTime stats
• wakapi is a self-hosted WakaTime-compatible backend with its own web interface
• waka-box relies on WakaTime's API, while wakapi can be used as an alternative to WakaTime

Use Cases

• Choose waka-box for a simple, quick setup to display coding stats on GitHub
• Opt for wakapi if you prefer self-hosting and want more control over your coding data

Community and Support

• waka-box: 1.5k+ stars, active community
• wakapi: 1k+ stars, growing community, regular updates