[jeffnash]

The timing of this is very funny for me, personally. After the Claude Code Rust re-implementation, I wanted to see how far I could push 'spec-driven development' by re-implementing Notepad++ for Linux. I used four agentic loops to draft detailed from the source, implement the code, write tests to fix regressions, and compare the result with the original source. I then re-themed it and actually came out pretty well.

I initially worried that a brand new name (I went with nootpad) might misleadingly suggest the project was built from scratch rather than being a semi-clean-room re-implementation. Then, I saw that NPP was trademarked and my worries flipped the other direction; the reason I haven't yet published it was because I'm still removing all the NPP references from the source + comments in an abundance of caution, leaving a huge disclaimer/attribution in the README. I know that OSS is an opinionated place and didn't want to step on any toes.

I must say, having all of that anxiety and seeing this guy literally put Don Ho's picture on the website and say that it was being re-named "in collaboration with" Don Ho (i.e. not in response to a legal threat) made me laugh out loud.

[soleveloper]

NixPad++

But don't block on the name, you could release it under NejneobhospodařovávatelnějšíPad++ and people will download.

It'll be easy search & replace later once you settle on a name

[lukan]

If you make it run stable, please do publish it at earliest opportunity.

(I volunteer for testing)

I guess now is also the time to ask Don Ho if he is ok with it the way it is. I guess he says yes. He did not take issue with the source of "notepad++ for mac" but with the branding. That people think he is behind. Nootpad is distinctive enough from notepad++, if at all I would worry about microsoft taking issue.

[ssl-3]

"nootpad" is already a very dissimilar name and I wouldn't expect that to draw any ire from anyone. Trademarks aren't absolute in their breadth.

"Notepad++ For Linux" would probably piss some folks off, though. ;)

If in doubt, always ask for clarity. And then -- if/when clarity is provided -- simply proceed accordingly.

[jeffnash]

100%. I think I hadn't fully internalized the open source vs trademark ethe (TIL that's the disputed plural of ethos) in my head. I had two nightmare scenarios: the first was where people would say "you copied Notepad++ and didn't give enough attribution, you're a thief!" and the other where...what happened here happened.

I think this was just about as close as I could get to asking Don Ho directly how he would prefer a port to be handled without actually doing so. I plan on publishing it shortly after cleaning up some God objects :)

[msephton]

Call it Nopepad++