"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.
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.
I 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't that just be upstreamed?
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.
What was the terminal app though and what was special about it that Ghostty didn't already provide?
edit: Found this one article (via google) that talks about the terminal. I guess it was a terminal that you could "prompt" to do things and it would figure out the shell commands.
A terminal with AI focused on doing terminal-ish stuff is actually kind of useful.
I just never did enough of it to keep going.
If they expanded this to be highly optimized for devops aka really well attuned to AWS CLI all the various linux commands, bash scripting and just had all of that baked right in - and - was super fact and didn't have to think to much - I can see that.
The reason being, your doing 'specific tasks at a meta level' - not designing complex things, or doing research.
More like Claude Code but not for code, for DevOps and or that kind of things.
I think 'Meta Prompting' should be a thing for many disciplines.
That said, the 'bitter pill' lesson is that the Tier 1 models just really get good at everything and often supersede custom solutions - which was the case for myself and Warp, I just 'did stuff in Claude' and it was good enough.
Claude Code is very capable of making a terminal emulator with exactly (and only) the features you want. I did that for myself and it's now my daily driver. Has a few goodies I care about but nothing much else, and I have no intention of adding features for other people: https://github.com/cartermp/term
I've looked at Warp before and seen that it has some potentially useful features for a command line terminal program, like having each command be its own little history window which you can scroll independently and collapse. (I might have imagined/inferred those from the screenshots of it working though). So an alternative implementation does sound interesting, but I would want it just to be a terminal, not with any AI or agent stuff in it.
I hope they bring back the former UI that allowed you to explicitly toggle "AI / Agent" mode on/off in a terminal session, and gets rid of the Oz / Cloud Agent stuff.
I don't want this auto-detect agent request. The explicit toggle was perfect.
The AI stuff is layered on in a way where it doesn't get in the way. Very useful for command completion and stuff like that, without having to open claude.
What even is Warp now? I remember it as the electron terminal and totally dismissing it. Then I think I read it got the RIIR treatment, but there was already Ghostty and Alacritty by then. Now it looks like it’s another AI thing?
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.
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.
Only a trademark violation if a trademark has been registered. IANAL.
> WARP® trademark registration is intended to cover the categories of [...] Downloadable computer terminal emulator program [...]
Warp made heavy use of open source itself, and then realized that even more open was the only good way to make this work.
They should be grateful. This is the entire point of free and open source software. (even if this isn't 'free' licensed, it's still a good thing)
Also calling a fork "Open" is disingenious. You wouldn't be able to fork it if the original wasn't "open".
Does anyone keep a DB somewhere of open source project names?
I think it would be better to give the code fork a different name.... And maybe move it off Github!!
Is Warp trademarked?
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't that just be upstreamed?
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.
edit: Found this one article (via google) that talks about the terminal. I guess it was a terminal that you could "prompt" to do things and it would figure out the shell commands.
https://thenewstack.io/developer-review-of-warp-for-windows-...
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47936719
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47940669
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47941398
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47941581
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47941712
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47941782
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47941974
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47942198
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47943175
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47947007
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47948005
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47952979
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47970965
I can run Claude Code there or whatever. But I personally don't need the AI in the terminal itself.
I just never did enough of it to keep going.
If they expanded this to be highly optimized for devops aka really well attuned to AWS CLI all the various linux commands, bash scripting and just had all of that baked right in - and - was super fact and didn't have to think to much - I can see that.
The reason being, your doing 'specific tasks at a meta level' - not designing complex things, or doing research.
More like Claude Code but not for code, for DevOps and or that kind of things.
I think 'Meta Prompting' should be a thing for many disciplines.
That said, the 'bitter pill' lesson is that the Tier 1 models just really get good at everything and often supersede custom solutions - which was the case for myself and Warp, I just 'did stuff in Claude' and it was good enough.
How exactly does it help with "terminal-based AI work"?
So alas this doesn't appear to be it.
I don't want this auto-detect agent request. The explicit toggle was perfect.
So not a terminal?
The AI stuff is layered on in a way where it doesn't get in the way. Very useful for command completion and stuff like that, without having to open claude.
What the heck is warp???
Warp is now open-source
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47936264