head to head · open source

Coder vs flow-next

Coder has 15,676 GitHub stars, 1,525 forks, 996 open issues and last shipped yesterday. flow-next has 698 stars, 55 forks, 6 open issues and last shipped 2 days ago. Coder leads on adoption by 2,146% (15,676 vs 698 stars). Coder is written in Go under AGPL-3.0; flow-next is written in Python under MIT. Coder has attracted 10% as many forks as stars, flow-next 8%. Coder was the more recently maintained of the two, and both are self-hostable with no licence fee.

Two open source projects, one decision. Both are free and self-hostable — the differences are community size, license terms, language stack and release pace.

Coder ★ 16K flow-next ★ 698 category Developer Tools

← all 20902 open source comparisons

Side by side

Coder flow-next
GitHub stars ★ 16K ★ 698
License AGPL-3.0 MIT
Written in Go Python
Last push 2026-09-20 2026-09-19
Forks ⑂ 1.5K ⑂ 55
Self-hosting Yes Yes
Data ownership Your server Your server

pick Coder if

  • You weight community size — 16K stars and counting
  • You want the AGPL-3.0 license terms
  • Your stack matches Go
  • You value the larger contributor base for long-term maintenance

full Coder profile →

pick flow-next if

  • You want the flow-next feature set and don't need the biggest community
  • You prefer the MIT license terms
  • Your stack matches Python
  • You evaluated both and flow-next fits your workflow better

full flow-next profile →

About Coder

Coder is a self hosted platform for cloud development environments and AI coding agents. It is written in Go, released under AGPL 3.0, and listed under Developer Tools / Version Control & Collaboration. Teams define workspaces with Terraform, connect through a secure Wireguard tunnel, and run environments on EC2 VMs, Kubernetes Pods, or Docker Containers.

read the full Coder overview →

About flow-next

Flow Next is a workflow plugin that runs inside AI coding agents such as Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, and Droid, turning a change request into specs, implementation, adversarial cross model review, and a pull request with recorded evidence, and it is aimed at individual developers and teams who already generate code with agents but lack a repeatable way to verify the result.

read the full flow-next overview →

More in Developer Tools

ECC ★ 263K react ★ 251K OpenCode ★ 209K vscode ★ 193K Langflow ★ 155K Supabase ★ 110K

Related comparisons

gitea vs gogs codegraph vs code-review-graph gitea vs open-code-review gitea vs code-review-graph gitea vs reflex gogs vs open-code-review gitea vs gitlab gitea vs gitbutler openclaw vs langflow ecc vs react ecc vs langflow react vs langflow ecc vs supabase react vs supabase n8n vs langflow ecc vs puppeteer openclaw vs openhands openclaw vs paperclip hermes-agent vs pi hermes-agent vs openhands hermes-agent vs paperclip opencode vs pi opencode vs openhands opencode vs paperclip

More Version Control & Collaboration projects

Compare either of these against the rest of the Version Control & Collaboration field.

Coder vs Gitea Coder vs Gogs Coder vs open-code-review Coder vs code-review-graph Coder vs Reflex Coder vs GitLab Coder vs GitButler Coder vs gitpod Coder vs pr-agent Coder vs Encore Coder vs reviewdog Coder vs hunk

Frequently asked questions

Is Coder or flow-next more popular?

Coder has 15,676 GitHub stars and flow-next has 698. Coder has the larger community by that measure.

Are Coder and flow-next free?

Both are open source. Coder is licensed under AGPL-3.0 and flow-next under MIT. Neither carries a licence fee.

What is the difference between Coder and flow-next?

Coder is written in Go and flow-next in Python. The practical differences are community size, licence terms, language stack and release cadence — all compared in the table above.

Which should I choose, Coder or flow-next?

Choose Coder if you want the larger community (15,676 stars) or its AGPL-3.0 licence terms. Choose flow-next if its feature set, stack or MIT licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.