XX-net/XX-Net

Choose this fork only if you need its legacy site/protocol tweaks and are comfortable inheriting an abandoned, highly divergent codebase. For most adopters, upstream is the safer choice.

Prefer this fork only if you specifically need its old connection-tuning and debug behavior. For general use, upstream is far more current, better maintained, and much less risky.

Choose upstream unless you specifically need this fork’s legacy 2016 behavior or its bundled routing/data customizations. This fork looks like a frozen, heavily modified snapshot with useful local deployment conveniences, but it is too stale for most new adopters.

Choose upstream unless you specifically need this legacy fork’s custom update/startup behavior or are maintaining an old deployment. For most adopters, the stale baseline and large divergence make this a poor default choice.

Choose this fork only if you need its older proxy behavior or specific 2018-era enhancements; otherwise upstream is the better default because this fork is stale and far behind.

Prefer upstream unless you specifically need this fork’s older custom proxy data and deployment tweaks; for most adopters, the fork is too stale and too far behind to be the safer default.

Prefer upstream unless you specifically need this older customized fork. This fork looks like a legacy, highly diverged snapshot with local data and packaging changes, not an actively maintained alternative.

Choose this fork only if you want a legacy customized baseline and are prepared to maintain it yourself. For most adopters, upstream is the safer choice because this fork is both stale and heavily diverged.

Prefer this fork only if you specifically need its old custom launcher/startup and IP-list tweaks. For most adopters, upstream is the better choice because this fork is far behind and likely harder to maintain.