PartKeepr Alternative: When Free, Self-Hosted Parts Inventory Isn't Free

The right PartKeepr alternative depends on what your team needs from a parts system now that PartKeepr itself has stopped moving. Its GitHub repository shows it was archived by the owner on 2 July 2025 and is now read-only, and its README still lists PHP 7.0 to 7.1 as the requirement.

The practical problem is not the archive notice on its own. It is that a parts catalogue your purchasing, assembly and engineering staff rely on now runs on code that will receive no fixes, on a PHP branch that php.net lists as unsupported since 1 December 2019. This guide checks that status, compares the realistic alternatives on one shared hypothetical scenario and shows how to move your data out without losing what matters.

Parts systems exist to tell engineers and buyers what is on the shelf before a build starts. Illustrative photograph, not an OpsMavix project.

Image credit: Nicolas Thomas, Unsplash License. No edits.

Key Takeaways

• PartKeepr’s GitHub repository was archived on 2 July 2025 and requires PHP 7.0 to 7.1, both past end of life.
• InvenTree, Part-DB and Binner are actively developed open source options with different strengths.
• PartsBox is a hosted commercial option with published plans and a PartKeepr migration route.
• Compare options on one scenario: fit, limitations, integrations and three-year cost including staff time.
• Part-DB documents a direct PartKeepr importer, but it is beta and leaves stock history behind.
• Pilot with your own parts, locations and a real build before switching everyone over.

In this guide:

• 1. Check the Current Status of PartKeepr
• 2. Define What Your Parts System Must Do
• 3. Compare the Main PartKeepr Alternatives
• 4. Set Up One Shared Scenario
• 5. Compare Three Year Cost on the Scenario
• 6. Plan the Migration Out of PartKeepr
• 7. Choose Between Packaged Software and a Custom Build
• 8. Run a Pilot Before You Switch
• Frequently Asked Questions
• How OpsMavix Can Help

1. Check the Current Status of PartKeepr

What the project’s own pages show

PartKeepr describes itself on partkeepr.org as “Open Source Inventory Management”, with fast search, CSV and Excel export, CSV import and barcode scanner support. The site does not state a current version or a maintenance policy.

The GitHub repository is clearer. At the time of writing it shows:

What that means in practice

An archived repository does not stop an existing installation working tomorrow. It does mean there will be no security patches, no fixes for the open issues and no official upgrade path to newer PHP versions. According to php.net’s end-of-life list, PHP 7.0 reached end of life on 10 January 2019 and PHP 7.1 on 1 December 2019.

So the risk sits in the stack underneath. Keeping PartKeepr running increasingly means keeping an old PHP version, an old operating system image or a container frozen in time. That can be acceptable for an isolated hobby bench. It is harder to justify for a parts database that several staff use to decide what to buy and what to build.

Signs it is time to move

• Nobody in the business can rebuild the PartKeepr server from scratch.
• The server is exposed to the internet or shared networks.
• You need features PartKeepr never finished, such as the parametric search its own site describes as under development.
• Purchasing or production planning has started working around it in spreadsheets.

2. Define What Your Parts System Must Do

Separate catalogue needs from stock control needs

A parts catalogue answers “what is this part, where is it and who supplies it?”. Stock control answers “how many can we actually use, what is reserved for a build and what must we reorder?”. Many PartKeepr installations were set up for the first job and are now being asked to do the second.

If the right-hand column matters most, judge each alternative on how it handles movements, reservations and purchasing, not just how it stores part data. Our guide to a SKU tracker you can trust covers why counts drift when movements are not captured at source.

Requirements checklist

1. Number of active part numbers and storage locations.
2. Number of named users and the permissions each role needs.
3. Whether you need BOMs, build tracking, purchase orders or sales orders.
4. Supplier data lookups you rely on, such as distributor part data and prices.
5. EDA links, for example KiCad libraries, if engineering works from them.
6. Barcode and label printing hardware already in use.
7. Who will host, back up and upgrade the system.
8. Which data must come across from PartKeepr, including attachments.

3. Compare the Main PartKeepr Alternatives

The options worth shortlisting

Each description below is taken from the project’s or vendor’s own pages. Check current releases and documentation before deciding, because they change.

• InvenTree. The InvenTree repository describes an “Open Source Inventory Management System” under the MIT License, built on Python and Django with a React front end, and acknowledges PartKeepr as “a valuable predecessor and inspiration”. The documentation says it is “designed to be lightweight and easy to use for SME or hobbyist applications” and covers part categories, nested stock locations, supplier parts, BOMs, build orders, serialised stock, a REST API and plugins. The installation guide calls Docker “the recommended method” and also lists a package installer and bare metal.
• Part-DB. The Part-DB repository describes “an Open source inventory management system for your electronic components”, licensed under AGPL-3.0 and built on Symfony with PHP 8.2 as the minimum. Listed features include storage locations, barcodes and labels, fine-grained user permissions, projects with BOMs that show how many builds are possible, KiCad integration and part data from providers including Octopart, Digikey, Farnell, LCSC and TME. Its documentation includes a PartKeepr migration guide.
• Binner. The Binner repository describes an “Open source parts inventory system for makers, electronics hobby, and professional engineers” under GPL-3.0, with part lookups from DigiKey, Mouser, Octopart/Nexar, Arrow and TME, order imports, label printing and KiCad support. The README states that the free open source version is limited to 3 users, with more users needing a subscription or paid licence. A hosted version runs at binner.io; we could not verify its prices, so they are not included here.
• PartsBox. A hosted commercial service. Its pricing page lists a free Maker plan for 1 user and paid plans from 49 EUR a month billed annually, excluding VAT. Its data migration page explains how to send a PartKeepr MySQL XML dump for import.

Side-by-side comparison

For the wider open source stock market, including OpenBoxes and ERPNext, see our sibling guide to open source inventory management software. This post stays with electronic parts and the move away from PartKeepr.

4. Set Up One Shared Scenario

The hypothetical business

To compare options fairly, every figure in this section and the next is hypothetical and used only for illustration.

A hypothetical electronics assembler has used PartKeepr for several years. It has:

• 2,500 active part numbers across 400 drawer and reel locations.
• 6 named users: 2 engineers, 2 buyers and 2 assembly staff.
• About 15 builds a month, each driven by a BOM exported from KiCad.
• One part-time person who looks after the PartKeepr server.
• An internal cost of £40 an hour for staff time spent on administration.
• A server cost of £20 a month for any self-hosted option.

What each option must prove on this scenario

5. Compare Three Year Cost on the Scenario

Every component on a board is a line in a parts system that someone has to keep accurate. Illustrative photograph, not an OpsMavix project.

Image credit: Abolfazl Pahlavan, Unsplash License. No edits.

Hypothetical worked example

The hours below are hypothetical assumptions for the shared scenario, not measured results. The PartsBox subscription uses the published Production plan price of 99 EUR a month billed annually for 3 users, plus 12 EUR per extra user a month, excluding VAT.

The PartsBox total is shown in two currencies on purpose: the subscription is billed in euros and the staff time is in pounds, and converting would add an exchange-rate assumption. PartsBox says migration is free for newly subscribed commercial-plan customers, which is why no migration fee appears.

What the numbers show

• Staying put is not the cheapest option in this hypothetical, because the admin time on an unmaintained stack is the largest line.
• The two self-hosted options differ mainly in migration effort. Part-DB has a documented importer; InvenTree would need a CSV-based import or third-party tooling.
• The hosted subscription costs more in cash but shifts hosting, backups and upgrades away from your staff.
• Binner is left out of the arithmetic because 6 users exceed its free 3-user cap and we could not verify the paid price.

Change the hours, user count and hourly rate to your own and the ranking can change. The point is to compare complete costs, not licence fees.

Integrations to price in

If parts data must reach accounting or a sales system, add the cost of that connection to every row.

6. Plan the Migration Out of PartKeepr

What a direct importer carries across

Part-DB’s migration guide is the most detailed published route. It uses a mysqldump --xml export of the PartKeepr database and a console import command.

The guide states that the feature is beta and that the import “will delete all existing data in the Part-DB database”. Run it into a fresh instance, never one already in use.

PartsBox asks for the same mysqldump XML export and handles the import as custom work after you subscribe. It notes that its JSON export does not include file attachments, which matters if you ever leave.

Migration checklist

1. Take a full database dump and copy of the PartKeepr file and image folders.
2. Record counts: parts, locations, projects, attachments and total stock quantity.
3. Export stock history separately if you need it for audit, because importers may drop it.
4. Clean duplicates and dead locations before import, not after.
5. Import into a test instance and compare the counts from step 2.
6. Spot-check 50 parts, including ones with several manufacturers or metaparts.
7. Re-enable users and set permissions by role.
8. Freeze PartKeepr edits on a set date, re-run the import and switch over.

If your data started life in spreadsheets, our guide to when a parts tracking spreadsheet stops coping covers the clean-up rules that apply here too.

7. Choose Between Packaged Software and a Custom Build

Match the approach to the gap

Packaged tools deserve a fair hearing. InvenTree, Part-DB and PartsBox already solve most of the core parts problem, and configuring one of them is usually faster than building from scratch. A custom application earns its place when the gap is specific and valuable, for example kitting rules, customer-supplied parts or a production flow the tools model awkwardly. Our posts on kitting software and bill of materials management cover two common examples.

Questions that decide it

• Does any option pass the six scenario tests in section 4 without workarounds?
• Who will own hosting, upgrades and backups in year three, not just at launch?
• Can you export all data, including attachments, if you change route later?
• Is the remaining gap worth building, or can you live with it?

For the open source versus built decision on the production floor, see our OpenMES alternative guide, and for the bespoke route in more depth, custom inventory systems.

8. Run a Pilot Before You Switch

Choose a representative slice

Pick one product family and its storage area. Include a part with several manufacturers, a reel with a partial quantity, a part used in many BOMs and one that is often miscounted.

Run real work through the new system for two to four weeks while PartKeepr stays read-only for the same slice. Name the person who accepts each test result.

Pilot acceptance checklist

1. Imported parts, locations and attachments match the PartKeepr counts.
2. A KiCad BOM loads and shows the correct buildable quantity.
3. Picking for a build reduces stock in the right locations.
4. A shortage turns into a purchase or a clear buying task.
5. A partial delivery is booked without a workaround.
6. Assembly staff cannot edit part master data.
7. Labels print and barcodes scan on the devices people actually use.
8. A backup is restored successfully into a test copy.
9. Someone other than the installer can follow the admin notes.
10. All data, including attachments, can be exported again.

If several items fail, revisit section 7 before rolling out further.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is PartKeepr still maintained?

Its GitHub repository was archived by the owner on 2 July 2025 and is read-only, so no further fixes can be merged there. The project’s own site does not state a maintenance policy or current version.

Can I keep running PartKeepr?

An existing installation can keep working, but it requires PHP 7.0 to 7.1, which php.net lists as end of life since 2019. Keeping it isolated from untrusted networks reduces exposure, but nobody will fix new problems.

What is the closest open source replacement for PartKeepr?

For electronic components with a direct import path, Part-DB documents a PartKeepr importer. InvenTree is broader, adding build orders, stock tracking and a plugin system, and names PartKeepr as an inspiration.

Can I migrate my PartKeepr data automatically?

Partly. Part-DB’s beta importer brings across parts, locations, prices, parameters, projects and attachments, but not stock history or full metapart behaviour. PartsBox imports a PartKeepr XML dump as a service for new subscribers.

Is a hosted service cheaper than self-hosting?

It depends on how much staff time hosting really takes. In our hypothetical scenario the hosted subscription cost more in cash but removed most admin hours. Run the same arithmetic with your own figures.

Does Binner suit a team?

Its free open source version is limited to 3 users according to its README. Larger teams need a subscription or paid licence, so check current terms with the project before planning around it.

Do I need an ERP instead?

Only if finance, sales and purchasing must change alongside parts. If accounting works and the pain is in the parts store, a focused parts tool is usually less to adopt. Our guide to operational systems versus ERP covers that choice.

Can OpsMavix build a custom parts inventory system?

Yes. OpsMavix can build focused applications or a full custom ERP, and can configure or integrate suitable existing tools where those approaches fit the requirements.

How OpsMavix Can Help

OpsMavix can review how parts move from purchasing through storage to builds, then compare an open source tool, a hosted product, an integration or a focused build against the same requirements.

Depending on the gap, that may mean an inventory automation system that keeps part counts tied to real movements, or manufacturing production tracking that connects BOMs and builds to the stock they consume.

Contact OpsMavix with one recent build shortage, the records behind it and the handoff that creates the most rework. We can use that evidence to define requirements and a practical pilot.