Pros of Kanboard

• Lightweight and minimalist design, focusing on simplicity and ease of use
• Built-in time tracking and reporting features
• Supports plugins for extended functionality

Cons of Kanboard

• Less visually appealing interface compared to Wekan
• Fewer built-in integrations with third-party services
• Limited customization options for board appearance

Code Comparison

Kanboard (PHP):

<?php
require_once __DIR__.'/app/common.php';
$container['router']->dispatch();

Wekan (JavaScript):

import { Meteor } from 'meteor/meteor';
import '../config/accounts';
import '../config/at_config';
import '../config/moment';
Meteor.startup(() => {
  // ...
});

Kanboard uses PHP and follows a more traditional web application structure, while Wekan is built with Meteor, a full-stack JavaScript framework. This difference in technology stack impacts the development experience and deployment options for each project.

Both projects are open-source kanban board solutions, but they cater to slightly different user needs. Kanboard focuses on simplicity and core functionality, while Wekan offers a more feature-rich and visually polished experience. The choice between the two depends on specific project requirements and user preferences.

Pros of Focalboard

• More modern and visually appealing user interface
• Better integration with other Mattermost products
• Stronger focus on project management and task organization

Cons of Focalboard

• Less mature and established compared to Wekan
• Fewer customization options and plugins
• Limited support for advanced kanban features

Code Comparison

Focalboard (TypeScript):

export function createBoard(teamId: string, title: string): Board {
    return {
        id: Utils.createGuid(),
        teamId,
        title,
        icon: '',
        description: '',
        createAt: Date.now(),
        updateAt: Date.now(),
        deleteAt: 0,
        minimumRole: '',
    }
}

Wekan (JavaScript):

Boards.insert({
  title: board.title,
  slug: getSlug(board.title),
  archived: false,
  createdAt: new Date(),
  modifiedAt: new Date(),
  stars: 0,
  labels: [],
  members: [],
  permission: board.permission,
});

Both repositories offer open-source kanban board solutions, but they cater to different needs. Focalboard is more focused on modern project management within the Mattermost ecosystem, while Wekan provides a more traditional and customizable kanban experience. The code comparison shows that Focalboard uses TypeScript and has a more structured approach to board creation, while Wekan uses JavaScript and directly interacts with the database for board insertion.

Pros of Wekan

• More active development and frequent updates
• Larger community and contributor base
• Better documentation and support resources

Cons of Wekan

• Potentially more complex setup and configuration
• May have more features than necessary for some users
• Larger codebase could lead to more potential bugs

Code Comparison

Wekan (main repository):

Template.headerBarContent.events({
  'click .js-create-board': Popup.open('createBoard'),
  'click .js-open-archived-board': Popup.open('archivedBoards'),
  'click .js-change-language': Popup.open('changeLanguage'),
});

Wekan (fork):

Template.headerBarContent.events({
  'click .js-create-board': Popup.open('createBoard'),
  'click .js-open-archived-board': Popup.open('archivedBoards'),
  // Language change functionality removed
});

The code comparison shows that the fork has removed the language change functionality, potentially simplifying the user interface but reducing language options.

Note: The comparison between wekan/wekan and wekan/wekan> is unclear, as they appear to be the same repository. The comparison provided assumes a hypothetical fork with minor differences. In reality, these repositories would likely be identical, making a meaningful comparison impossible without more specific information about any potential differences or branches.