buddy vs sourcery
Refactoring roots, different scope
Sourcery started as a refactoring assistant — code quality suggestions in the editor — and grew into pull request review. That heritage shows in what it is good at, and in the shape of what it leaves to other tools.
$ buddy touch 128 --name simplify
__
(\,------'()'--o simplify, as a suggestion
(_ ___ /~" not a commit
(_)_) (_)_)
→ duplicated retry logic in worker.ts
and queue.ts could share one helper
→ the nested ternary at parse.ts:60
reads as three conditions
✗ left alone: the early return in
auth.ts would change behaviour for
an empty token
posted as a suggestion. no branch opened.
simplification is taste, and taste is
not a bot's call to commit.
Findings are failures, not preferences
Buddy's review reports what a change breaks — a dropped error that turns an expired session into a valid login, a retry counter that never terminates. Style and simplification live in the simplify finishing touch, which posts a suggestion rather than committing to your branch.
Merge gates
Title format, description sections, linked issue, dependency policy and your own English assertions, published as a check run branch protection can require.
Dependencies included
Grouped updates, real changelogs, OSV advisories, a pinned dashboard and auto-merge across eleven ecosystems.
Workflow supply-chain audit
bash injection, excessive permissions, unpinned actions, self-hosted exposure — the CI footguns a code reviewer does not look at.
No key required for the floor
Secret scanning and the analyzers run offline. Useful in a pre-commit hook, and free on every repository.
Your CI, your model
No hosted app on your repository. The diff goes to the provider you chose, or nowhere.
Side by side
| Buddy | Sourcery | |
|---|---|---|
| AI pull request review | ✅ | ✅ |
| Refactoring suggestions | Via the simplify touch | ✅ core strength |
| IDE integration | — | ✅ |
| Dependency updates | ✅ | — |
| Security advisories, licence policy | ✅ | — |
| Workflow supply-chain audit | ✅ | — |
| Merge gates as check runs | ✅ | — |
| CI repair | ✅ | — |
| Local pre-push review | ✅ CLI | ✅ IDE |
| Works with no API key | ✅ analyzers | — |
| Runs entirely in your CI | ✅ | Hosted |
| Bring your own model | ✅ | — |
| Open source | ✅ MIT | — |
Product capabilities change; check Sourcery's own documentation before deciding on any single row.
Where Sourcery is the better choice
- You want refactoring suggestions while you type. Sourcery's editor integration is the thing it has been building longest, and Buddy has no IDE plugin at all — its local story is a CLI you run.
- Python-first teams who value the depth Sourcery built up there.
- You want a hosted product with a dashboard and support rather than a binary and a config file.
Where Buddy is different
- Scope. Review is one of several jobs: merge gates, CI repair, the workflow audit and the whole dependency half sit alongside it.
- Taste is delivered as a suggestion. Simplification is posted for you to accept, not committed to your branch — because "cleaner" is an opinion and opinions do not belong in an automated commit.
- It runs where your code already is. No app installed, no diff leaving your pipeline, no per-developer licence.
- A free floor everywhere.
--lightgives every repository secret scanning and a workflow audit for nothing.
Related
AI code review · Finishing touches · Local review · All comparisons