That seems pretty risky to use the name Warp in the fork. Seems like a legal situation there.
OpenWarp
141–150 of 159 posts
Re: OpenWarp
#142"OpenWarp is a community fork of Warp's open-source code. It is not affiliated with Warp Inc. and follows the upstream AGPL / MIT dual license." It is rude, and possibly a trademark violation, to fork a project and use the same name. And, how can there be a "community fork" when there is no community? It's just been Open Sourced 24 hours ago.
Agreed. They should not be using the name Warp inside of the fork.
Re: OpenWarp
#143I don't use Warp, but it seems to me they did something cool (terminal app), pivoted that attention into a profitable AI play, but a lot of people just wanted the terminal app. Now nobody knows what Warp is anymore, because they want to be an Agentic IDE and that's not what the users want. Do I have that right? I don't see what the point of this OpenWarp fork is though, other than adding more provider support. Couldn…
Yeah, pretty much. I used it, but one day I opened Warp and it looked like a half-baked Cursor. I liked it for the ability to type "git one-liner logs with date and author, no messages" and get the output without having to remember or look for actual formatting parameters. I also get that's too niche of an use case, and not sustainable as a business. But still.
I have this functionality bound in alt-backslash using this - https://github.com/CGamesPlay/llm-cmd-comp
You write your prompt in any terminal, press alt-backslash and it'll give you a command which you can either refine or accept (or esc/ctrl-c out).
Re: OpenWarp
#144I don't use Warp, but it seems to me they did something cool (terminal app), pivoted that attention into a profitable AI play, but a lot of people just wanted the terminal app. Now nobody knows what Warp is anymore, because they want to be an Agentic IDE and that's not what the users want. Do I have that right? I don't see what the point of this OpenWarp fork is though, other than adding more provider support. Couldn…
I really liked it, even though I didn't use any of the AI stuff. Then they just keep pushing the AI harder and harder, and I finally stopped and figured out how to configure the Win11 Terminal app "good enough" and dropped it.
It's not as good, but it's good enough.
Re: OpenWarp
#145Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think you understand. I'm well aware it can run whatever command on bash. You're taking a significant risk asking it to do what it's doing via ssh, because it could easily forget that it's suppose to be doing ssh and do whatever locally. The point is: opencode should have a specific deterministic tool like https://www.npmjs.com/package/node-ssh where commands can only be run; the environment can only be the r…
In practice I just don't think this is a real problem, or at least not one I've seen. I do something like this a lot with local VMs managed through Incus (so not literally invoking ssh but the exact same pattern) and they don't "mess up" in that particular way. If they ever did they figured it out immediately and I didn't even make note of it happening. I guess to sum up my feelings on it: if you don't think the tool…
You're still ignoring the crux of the difference in _risk_. Say the risk of `rm -rf /` for any given model is 1%. That is, the probabilty, that it'll just absolutely saveagly destroy the system you're working on. We know it's lower than that, because millions of tokens per day are generated and we only get a few of these "production database was wiped" news items.
There difference is still: If that risk-reward is to be recieved, you can't tell me you'd rather have it run locally than on some system you're managing. Because POV, you're the one responsible and if a coding tool _takes out your system_, you no longer have any means to fix the problem.
So, maybe the risk-reward is _technically_ equal, but only if the operator of the coding tool continues to operate regardless of what commands it's issuing. That's not the case if you're just saying "hey guy, use ssh for all your commands"
Re: OpenWarp
#146Earlier quoted context omitted.
Rocky Linux was a corporate fork with numerous dubious ethical decisions early on
Rocky Enterprise Software Foundation is a benefit corporation founded by the original founder of CentOS and other CentOS developers in response to CentOS becoming a stream OS instead of a stable OS. You'll have to be specific about what dubious ethical decisions you mean. I'm unaware of any, and I feel like I'm pretty tuned into this specific story.
I mean here are just a few of the issues re: the founding https://hackernoon.com/the-case-against-rocky-linux
If you’re “pretty tuned in” you would at least know that all this founder & foundation fluff is a load of corporate PR BS.
I was also referring to them shipping broken releases early on and them fighting with users about it instead of fixing and figuring out why they were publishing broken garbage.
Re: OpenWarp
#147Warp founder here. It's cool to see the community excitement here. Note that we are going to add bring-your-own-model directly into Warp. Would love interested folks to weigh in on the discussion here: https://github.com/warpdotdev/warp/discussions/9619
That was exactly my question; why fork? I assumed the project owners were preserving their business model, but if you allow it to be opened-up and turn off the cloud features, I see no reason to fork.
Re: OpenWarp
#148Warp founder here. It's cool to see the community excitement here. Note that we are going to add bring-your-own-model directly into Warp. Would love interested folks to weigh in on the discussion here: https://github.com/warpdotdev/warp/discussions/9619
Cool will run this in Hyperia.
Re: OpenWarp
#149A word of warning: I just installed OpenWarp from source, but it looks like it will not let me use my own provider without signing up for an $20/month account -- just like the original Warp I very much wish the OpenWarp folks would have made this clear on their README.md file.
You need to switch to the openWarp branch, master is the official code
Re: OpenWarp
#150Earlier quoted context omitted.
what is the point of an "ai-terminal" when you can already just directly run ai in a normal terminal your banner says: > Bring any AI model into your terminal its already there. there is no need for a special terminal to do this. in fact better to not have such a thing
Despite the newish "AI" branding for what I would presume is marketing buzz reasons, most of Warp is really centered around trying to make a terminal interface not anchored to legacy assumptions, like the blocks functionality ( https://docs.warp.dev/terminal/blocks ).
This page doesn't tell me anything useful about what this feature does or how it works. The attached screenshot is pointless. I assume the actual information is in the embedded Youtube video. YouTube is not an acceptable alternative to written documentation