If the new project did retain his credit, then, yeah, he's got no legal recourse.
How should the other project retain the original project credit? How should be my project referenced?
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.
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.
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.
As for the specific colors, many people use those color choices when designing a CLI.
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).
1) You could potentially use a DMCA claim to take down the repo, if there has been a license violation. But:
2) This is not plagiarism. You put the code under a license that says almost-literally "do anything you want with this code", and they did. There is no legal obligation to use pull requests instead of forks.
> What would you do if this happens with your project?
Probably ignore it. If your version is better, people will use it instead. If it isn't, that's life.