I'm excited to share what I've been building for the last +5 years: SuperPlanner, an all-in-one daily planner and task manager for iPhone, iPad and Mac.
I tried many productivity apps but I was tired of switching back and forth between multiple apps to manage my day. I wanted to build an app that could allow me to manage my time, as well as my tasks, from a single place.
SuperPlanner is a native app for iPhone, iPad and Mac. It's written with Swift and follows the Apple Human Design Guidelines to ensure a clean and familiar user interface for Apple devices.
No account creation is required to use SuperPlanner, and your data is stored locally in your device and synced between your devices using iCloud.
There are many features on the app, from features to ensure you can fully organize your things to do, such as recurrence rules and priorities, to features to customize the app, such as colors, icons and accent colors.
I hope you enjoy trying the app, and I look forward to hearing your feedback!
I'm excited to share what I've been building for the last +5 years: SuperPlanner, an all-in-one daily planner and task manager for iPhone, iPad and Mac.
I tried many productivity apps but I was tired of switching back and forth between multiple apps to manage my day. I wanted to build an app that could allow me to manage my time, as well as my tasks, from a single place.
SuperPlanner is a native app for iPhone, iPad and Mac. It's written with Swift and follows the Apple Human Design Guidelines to ensure a clean and familiar user interface for Apple devices.
No account creation is required to use SuperPlanner, and your data is stored locally in your device and synced between your devices using iCloud.
There are many features on the app, from features to ensure you can fully organize your things to do, such as recurrence rules and priorities, to features to customize the app, such as colors, icons and accent colors.
The author of the competing project claims to have used no code from Mac-CLI. Why do you feel you deserve anything more than the "inspired by" credit they currently offer in their README file?
Your wording here:
A member on Github changed the name of the project, reduced the number of features by removing 3rd-party libraries (all of them are optional in my CLI), and took the entire idea including modularity, plugins and even the mac logo () on the title of the project.
Heavily implies the repository was cloned then edited, but it's being claimed that isn't the case. Can you clarify?
Absolutely. I am okay with creating a better tool using Python for example, but the competing project took the entire idea of a bash script on the local folder that implements plugins like my project.
Small details like the colors are the same on the colors script. I was referring to the fact that all those changes could have been done on the original project through Pull Requests, instead of dividing the effort.
>but the competing project took the entire idea of a bash script on the local folder that implements plugins like my project.
Ideas don't belong to anyone, though. And I'm sure you're not the first or only person to come up with "a bash script on the local folder that implements plugins". And unless you've got a patent on that, you've got no right to be upset that someone else does something you did first.
And again, you know, you did open source the code, which implies you want people to use your code and modify it if they wish.
But did they actually fork your project and not provide you credit? Your original comment made it seem as if they did, but now it appears you're just upset that someone else created a similar project to yours, rather than contribute to you.
If that's the case, it's understandable that you would rather they contribute to your project than have their own, but it's not plagiarism on their part. Contributions are a privilege, but forking is a right as far as open source is concerned.
The idea of using a bash script is not original. People have been writing custom bash scripts since about 1989. Why does it matter that the project was written in the same language if the argument is that they've copied your idea?
As for the specific colors, many people use those color choices when designing a CLI.
It's your license, dude. :-) It specifies how credit should be given.
Did they actually use any of your code? The idea doesn't count (unless you filed a patent in a country that recognizes software patents, which I'm guessing you didn't).
If they didn't use any of your code, "inspired by" is probably the best you're going to get (and they really wouldn't have to do that).
Thanks for your comment. My concern is that all the changes introduced by the other project could have been done through pull requests.
Also, the other project wouldn't exist if my project wasn't there. One thing is being inspired, another one is creating a separate project that is dividing the community effort in two, instead of focusing in one project.
They could have but would removing those 3rd party libraries be in the best interest of your project? It appears that the other developer merely wanted a trimmed down version of what you have.
As for possibly dividing the community: first, there's always competition. This is especially true in software where anyone with a keyboard and know-how can create a competitor. Second, if you're really concerned about community division, consider what happened with Node.js[0] and io.js[1]. Initially, io.js provided a slimmer and more frequently updated version of the same framework. Then they got together to discuss how they were dividing the community and decided to bring their projects together. Perhaps you should discuss such a merge with the author of the other project.
>> Do you think that I can do something by changing the license on my open source project?
You can do something about future forks by changing the license on your project. The existing fork was created under the current license on your project and you can not retroactively change that.
INAL. I'm not sure if there is much you can do. If you open sourced the project in such a way as another party can do what they want, we'll expect them to do whatever they want.
A week ago, a Github user had a fantastic idea: To implement modularity and plugins to be able to extend Mac CLI by adding new plugins or add new commands on the existing plugins.
I refactored the code to have a modular structure and now each of the commands is separated into plugins on the /mac-cli/plugins folder.
Since the modularity and plugins elevate Mac CLI to the next level, I would like to ask for your feedback to see what could be the next steps for the command line tool.
I'm excited to share what I've been building for the last +5 years: SuperPlanner, an all-in-one daily planner and task manager for iPhone, iPad and Mac.
I tried many productivity apps but I was tired of switching back and forth between multiple apps to manage my day. I wanted to build an app that could allow me to manage my time, as well as my tasks, from a single place.
SuperPlanner is a native app for iPhone, iPad and Mac. It's written with Swift and follows the Apple Human Design Guidelines to ensure a clean and familiar user interface for Apple devices.
No account creation is required to use SuperPlanner, and your data is stored locally in your device and synced between your devices using iCloud.
There are many features on the app, from features to ensure you can fully organize your things to do, such as recurrence rules and priorities, to features to customize the app, such as colors, icons and accent colors.
I hope you enjoy trying the app, and I look forward to hearing your feedback!