I'm on the fish mailing list and it has been well received by current contribs and the original author. I expect that the two forks will be one at some point.

Why did they pick the exact same name?

Presumably because fish hasn't been updated since 2009 and they expect their fork to become the new standard version.

http://ridiculousfish.com/shell/beta.html

"Welcome to our fork of the fish shell, a command line shell like bash. Its working name is fishfish, but I hope eventually it will just be fish!"

Obvious joke is obvious, but he could have called it the Unno Fish Shell?

Looks interesting. I expect my fingers will be even more confused than ever switching machines now (they've never learned that Alt-3 isn't # on linux or that middle-click isn't paste in Putty)

There's no reason middle-click shouldn't be paste on PuTTY -- it's a configuration option.

That one always bites me at other people's desks; I'd figure out how to reconfigure it if it was mine. But there's always something jarring like that when you switch between similar-but-not-quite-the-same environments.

i've gotten to the point where i can subconciously key off the window chrome to know how to paste. (half my coworkers use xterm, the other half putty.)

It's not called that yet: "Its working name is fishfish, but I hope eventually it will just be fish!"

The ambition is quite reasonable as work on the fish shell itself has petered out, there was a recent dead cat bounce after a long fallow period, but it seems to be back to stasis there.

Well.. they do have quite a list of possibilities to piggy back off ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_common_fish_names ) that could reduce confusion but still maintain similarity.

I don't believe that's an option for the author as he's known as "fish" around the web. :)

http://ridiculousfish.com/blog/about.html

"ghoti" would be a perfect name for a ridiculous fish, though (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghoti)