Monodraw got an update the other week. It isn't being changed, but it doesn't need to.

Great little app. And it's $10, once. Hardly breaking the bank.

Absolutely we should. But this one isn't FOSS.

Why have you sent me the licence page for Monosketch? I'm commenting on comment about Monodraw...

Which of these two exchanges makes more sense?

1.

> But [monodraw]'s not open, and can't be edited by those who want to. We should always support FOSS.

> Absolutely we should. But [monodraw] isn't FOSS.

2.

> But [monodraw]'s not open, and can't be edited by those who want to. We should always support FOSS.

> Absolutely we should. But [monosketch] isn't FOSS.

The first interpretation makes no sense to me, because you've agreed completely with the parent comment but worded the comment in a way that sounds like you're disagreeing.

I would assume they sent that because they were suggesting to support FOSS over closed-source software.

> Based on the name

I think in this case the name alone is not enough to suspect a replacement; perhaps it’s just a similar product in the same domain (_mono_space visual editors).

Maybe it's just more or less feature-complete? Was curious, as someone who hadn't heard of it before, so I checked the blog. Last post is from April last year and concerns public testing of a new release. That's not particularly old, if you ask me?