Discofork
Repository brief

clash-verge-rev/clash-verge-rev

Read the upstream summary on the left, browse the cached forks below it, and load each fork comparison into the right-hand panel.

Cached analysis
cached 2026-03-29T22:24:02.598Z
3mo ago

clash-verge-rev/clash-verge-rev

clash-verge-rev/clash-verge-rev is an active, widely forked Tauri-based desktop GUI for Clash Meta/mihomo, aimed at proxy management on Windows, macOS, and Linux. It is a continuation of Clash Verge, ships with a Rust/Tauri backend and TypeScript/React frontend, and currently shows very recent development activity.

GitHub
Loading tags...
Stars106,195
Forks7,706
Default branchdev
Last pushed2026-03-29T17:18:47Z
Recommended shortcuts

Jump straight into Discofork's strongest cached fork picks, or open a compare view in one click.

Forks

Choose a fork to inspect

6 of 6 fork briefs
Selected

Choose this fork if you want a more tailored, actively tweaked proxy client and do not need immediate parity with upstream. Choose upstream if you want the latest bugfixes, broader release workflows, and lower divergence risk.

Choose this fork if you want a Windows-centric Fluent redesign and can accept staleness and upstream lag. Stick with upstream if you want active cross-platform maintenance and the latest fixes.

Choose this fork if you want an actively maintained but clearly divergent Clash Verge Rev variant with custom workflow and UI changes. Choose upstream if you want the standard release path and maximum compatibility with official docs and behavior.

Choose this fork only if you specifically want a near-upstream snapshot. For most adopters, upstream is the better choice because it is more current and this fork adds no clear user-facing value.

Choose this fork if you value its custom workflows and installer/runtime changes more than staying current with upstream. If you want the newest fixes and the broadest compatibility with upstream releases, the main project is the safer default.

Prefer this fork only if its specific early changes matter to you, especially Persian support or its config/proxy workflow tweaks. For most adopters, upstream is the better choice because it is far more active and has many later fixes that this fork appears to miss.