head to head · open source

Gitea vs flow-next

Gitea has 58,080 GitHub stars, 7,157 forks, 2,455 open issues and last shipped today. flow-next has 698 stars, 55 forks, 6 open issues and last shipped yesterday. Gitea leads on adoption by 8,221% (58,080 vs 698 stars). Gitea is written in Go under MIT; flow-next is written in Python under MIT. Gitea has attracted 12% as many forks as stars, flow-next 8%. Gitea 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.

Gitea ★ 58K flow-next ★ 698 category Developer Tools

← all 20902 open source comparisons

Side by side

Gitea flow-next
GitHub stars ★ 58K ★ 698
License MIT MIT
Written in Go Python
Last push 2026-09-20 2026-09-19
Forks ⑂ 7.2K ⑂ 55
Self-hosting Yes Yes
Data ownership Your server Your server

pick Gitea if

  • You weight community size — 58K stars and counting
  • You want the MIT license terms
  • Your stack matches Go
  • You value the larger contributor base for long-term maintenance

full Gitea 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 Gitea

Gitea is a self hosted, all in one software development service written in Go. It provides Git hosting, code review, issue tracking, project management (kanban), wiki, team collaboration, package registry, and CI/CD capabilities. The project aims to deliver a lightweight, painless alternative to larger platforms by running as a single binary across Linux, macOS, FreeBSD, OpenBSD, and Windows on multiple architectures.

read the full Gitea 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 gitea vs open-code-review gitea vs code-review-graph gitea vs reflex gitea vs gitlab gitea vs gitbutler codegraph vs code-review-graph gogs vs open-code-review 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.

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

Frequently asked questions

Is Gitea or flow-next more popular?

Gitea has 58,080 GitHub stars and flow-next has 698. Gitea has the larger community by that measure.

Are Gitea and flow-next free?

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

What is the difference between Gitea and flow-next?

Gitea 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, Gitea or flow-next?

Choose Gitea if you want the larger community (58,080 stars) or its MIT licence terms. Choose flow-next if its feature set, stack or MIT licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.