Learn how Cline and OpenCode differ in their key features, development activity, technology stack and community adoption, so you can decide which of these ai coding agents is best for you.
Last 30 days
Last commit
Repository age
Version
License
Repository

Last 30 days
Last commit
Repository age
Version
License
Repository

OpenCode appears to have several advantages over Cline, particularly in popularity and licensing. Consider your specific needs regarding popularity, growth, activity, technology, maturity, licensing and features when making your decision.
OpenCode significantly outpaces Cline in community adoption with 211,869 stars compared to 69,889 stars on GitHub. This 3.0x difference suggests OpenCode has a much larger and more active community. In terms of developer contributions, OpenCode has 28,191 forks, indicating strong developer engagement.
Cline and OpenCode are moving at much the same rate, adding 2,389 stars and adding 7,556 stars respectively over the last 30 days (+3.5% vs +3.7%). Neither is pulling away from the other on momentum alone.
Both projects show recent activity, with Cline last updated 1 hour ago and OpenCode 1 hour ago.
Both tools share common technology foundations, being built with JavaScript, CSS, Typescript, JSX. However, they differ in their additional technology choices: Cline uses Bash, Python, Ruby while OpenCode leverages Rust, Tauri.
Both projects started around the same time, with Cline beginning 2 years ago and OpenCode 1 year ago.
OpenCode uses the MIT license, which is more permissive than Cline's Apache-2.0 license, potentially offering greater flexibility for commercial use and integration.
Both tools serve similar use cases in AI Coding Agents.