head to head · open source

crit vs flow-next

crit has 1,101 GitHub stars, 88 forks, 22 open issues and last shipped yesterday. flow-next has 698 stars, 55 forks, 6 open issues and last shipped yesterday. crit leads on adoption by 58% (1,101 vs 698 stars). crit is written in Go under MIT; flow-next is written in Python under MIT. crit has attracted 8% as many forks as stars, flow-next 8%. flow-next was the more recently maintained of the two, and both are self-hostable with no licence fee. The two share 2 topic tags (cli, code-review), so they are genuine substitutes rather than adjacent tools.

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

crit ★ 1.1K flow-next ★ 698 category Developer Tools

← all 20902 open source comparisons

Side by side

crit flow-next
GitHub stars ★ 1.1K ★ 698
License MIT MIT
Written in Go Python
Last push 2026-09-19 2026-09-19
Forks ⑂ 88 ⑂ 55
Self-hosting Yes Yes
Data ownership Your server Your server

pick crit if

  • You weight community size — 1.1K stars and counting
  • You want the MIT license terms
  • Your stack matches Go
  • You value the larger contributor base for long-term maintenance

full crit 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 crit

Crit is a local, single binary review interface for agentic coding workflows that lets a developer comment directly on generated plans, code diffs, and frontend elements and send that feedback back to the coding agent.

read the full crit 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.

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

Frequently asked questions

Is crit or flow-next more popular?

crit has 1,101 GitHub stars and flow-next has 698. crit has the larger community by that measure.

Are crit and flow-next free?

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

What is the difference between crit and flow-next?

crit 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, crit or flow-next?

Choose crit if you want the larger community (1,101 stars) or its MIT licence terms. Choose flow-next if its feature set, stack or MIT licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.