howto align mount holes in 2 pcb the right way?

Inkscape is marked as "freeware" whereas it is licence under GPL which is a Free Licence as well as Open Source licence.

Suggest Trial 1

Change Title: "Licenced under GPL, which is a Free Licence"
Change: "inkscape (freeware) is" => "inkscape (Free Software, GPL)"
Reject reason: "This edit does not make the post even a little bit easier to read, easier to find, more accurate or more accessible. Changes are either completely superfluous or actively harm readability." (2 out of 3)

Suggest Trial 2

Change Title: "Inkscape is licenced under GPL, which is open source licence"
Change: "inkscape (freeware) is" => "inkscape (open source)"
Reject reason: same as above (2 out of 2)

Please fix that. Inkscape is Free software.


So, in total of 4, 3 people do not understand licencing or didnt bother to give a internet search. BUT they have high rep.
Result: Stackoverflow rep method got a problematic edge case. :)

| |
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ Besides this being needless nitpicking that is using a definition of the term shared by a minority, have you ever had a look at this? en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Open-source-vs-freeware.svg \$\endgroup\$ – PlasmaHH Apr 22 '16 at 9:57
  • \$\begingroup\$ @PlasmaHH so looking at that diagram, does it make gpl a freeware licence. hell no, please?! (and "minority" lol) \$\endgroup\$ – Kuldeep Singh Dhaka Apr 22 '16 at 10:13
  • \$\begingroup\$ "Open-source software and freeware are not the same thing!" did you even gave a read/look at the blog entry [link on the wiki image page]? \$\endgroup\$ – Kuldeep Singh Dhaka Apr 22 '16 at 10:16
  • \$\begingroup\$ another points chaser! \$\endgroup\$ – Kuldeep Singh Dhaka Apr 22 '16 at 10:24

Yes, I rejected your edit.

Because yes in the context of the answer I do not care.

An edit causes all kinds of stuff to happen (including my time in reviewing it) and for the purpose of using software it makes hell of a NOTHING difference if it's freeware, GPL, LGPL, MIT or anything else that means the software is FREE TO BE USED for the purpose of checking a graphical output.

An edit needs to add sufficient value to the post, as is explained in the rules, because it causes overhead.

Making an edit to reflect the also-free-ness-level of the completely uninteresting source code wasn't and will not be approved by me for anything that isn't a question about "Does anyone know if this free software is also open source?" - Which will be booted out of here anyway.

All in all you're wasting a huge deal of my and other people's time here with something completely irrelevant in the context of the answer as it was given.

| |
  • \$\begingroup\$ lol. you have limited knowledge with 11.8K points. \$\endgroup\$ – Kuldeep Singh Dhaka Apr 22 '16 at 7:11
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ Yup, if I'd seen this trivial nit-picking edit I would have rejected it too. +1 \$\endgroup\$ – Olin Lathrop Apr 22 '16 at 11:10
  • \$\begingroup\$ @KuldeepSinghDhaka: and you have unlimited knowledge with 13 points? \$\endgroup\$ – PlasmaHH Apr 22 '16 at 18:17
  • \$\begingroup\$ A person accepting "freeware" instead of "open-source" (or "free-software") is having limited knowledge of licencing, freeware are usually consider as whose executable are available free of charge. Its not nitpicking. if "EE" (and the "supporters") guy think free/open source software as freeware is his problem. not mine. from my prespective, i just saw the incorrect thing, i asked people to correct it. thats all! \$\endgroup\$ – Kuldeep Singh Dhaka Apr 23 '16 at 13:19
  • \$\begingroup\$ And btw, these "internet points" are not a declaration of having all knowledge of world. (in our case licencing information) \$\endgroup\$ – Kuldeep Singh Dhaka Apr 23 '16 at 13:21
  • \$\begingroup\$ @KuldeepSinghDhaka Weird, because I happen to have the knowledge that it makes no damn of a difference to the purpose of the answer and as such this matter and in a larger more inclusive sense the entire world. You need to drop this before people get really annoyed with you, because you're being a pig headed kid throwing a tantrum right now, not even TRYING to understand the points made. \$\endgroup\$ – Asmyldof Apr 24 '16 at 6:49

Your edits were nit-picks that added no value to the answer. In the context of the answer, "freeware" is good enough. It indicates that the software can be used without payment, which is all that is relevant in that answer. Expanding "freeware" to a bunch of lawyer-speak only adds noise and thereby decreases the value of the answer.

Stop nit-picking.

| |

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .