Not OS/2.
Yeah :-(
Here I was hoping that somehow IBM had decided to open source it. That would have been fun. But I don't think that will ever happen.
OpenWarp
51–60 of 159 posts
Re: OpenWarp
#52I don't think this should be dismissed as a cheap and rude ripoff. I'm no expert in trademarks or the naming convention part of the story, but for the rest: warp is not a great company taking far too long to roll back its weird account requirement, tracking users, enshittifying the core terminal experience with often unwanted AI and other crap features and dismissing annoyances that are brought up by 100eds of users. We need to show companies they need to behave or will be crushed by the community.
Re: OpenWarp
#53Earlier quoted context omitted.
You probably can't name a project OpenWarp for the same reason you can't name a search engine OpenGoogle, even though it's a different name to the original. In this case, it's particularly confusing because the original warp project _is_ now open source.
You can't name something OpenGoogle, because the Google name is trademarked. Is Warp trademarked?
It is, and the discussion is about etiquette, not law.
Re: OpenWarp
#54"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.
Definitely disagree about rudeness. Only a trademark violation if a trademark has been registered. IANAL.
Mixing etiquette and copyright.
It is not only rude but also misleading and frankly, stupid.
Re: OpenWarp
#55I 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 like Warp, because it looks and behaves the way I want a terminal emulator to. I disable all the AI features though because I don’t find them useful.
If this community fork were to, for example remove all of the AI features, it would be valuable to me.
Re: OpenWarp
#56"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.
[flagged]
It is not the "open" version of Warp. Warp is already open. So the name is rude.
Re: OpenWarp
#57Earlier quoted context omitted.
Warp was always an AI thing, as I recall - the seem much heavier on AI bandwagon nowadays, but their whole thing was a terminal for teams where you could share knowledge and command palettes and generate stuff.
Their "Introducing Warp" post from 2022 actually doesn't mention AI: https://www.warp.dev/blog/introducing-warp . They introduced Warp AI in 2023: https://www.warp.dev/blog/introducing-warp-ai I was pretty interested in it when it was just trying to be a modernized terminal. I still think some of the UI ideas are cool.
Gotcha, I must have encountered them later on then - thanks for posting the receipts!
I was a happy user for a while, but eventually some bugs drove me back to iTerm2 (in my case, hanging forever after certain terraform commands finished). Ghostty has filled my need for a better terminal since then.
Re: OpenWarp
#58at this stage, this being a fork instead of a pr is really weird
Re: OpenWarp
#59"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.
Definitely disagree about rudeness. Only a trademark violation if a trademark has been registered. IANAL.
One can claim a trademark without registering it (the difference between ™ and ®). But, if one wanted to sue, you'd probably register it first. But, a claimed trademark that is suitably unique for your product is defensible if you can prove consistent usage pre-dating the new user of that mark.
I'd be pissed if someone took one of my open source projects, forked it, and also stole the name (and put "Open" in front, despite the fact that the thing they forked is Open Source), misleading users and diluting the brand with software I have no control over.
I don't even know what Warp is, but I'm mad as hell about it. As an Open Source developer of 30 years, I expect people to operate with something like honor and decency and respect for other people. Taking someone's open project and launching a competing fork with the same name is hugely disrespectful and dishonorable behavior.
Re: OpenWarp
#60"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.
[flagged]
> even if this isn't 'free' licensed
What part of it isn't "free"?