Editorial policy
Corrections, disclosures, and independence
Our comparisons should be traceable to sources, honest about uncertainty, and correctable when projects or facts change.
Sourcing policy
We prefer primary sources: official repositories, READMEs, project documentation, official websites, release data, and license metadata. Claims that cannot be supported should be marked unconfirmed, narrowed, or removed. Comparison pages link the evidence available in the catalog.
Correction policy
Factual corrections are welcome. Send the affected URL, the disputed statement, and a primary source supporting the change through our contact page. Material corrections update the comparison record and its displayed update date. We may reject promotional requests that are not supported by evidence.
Automation and AI disclosure
Automated systems collect public metadata and AI-assisted systems organize evidence, classify alternatives, summarize documented capabilities, and check primary-feature alignment. These systems work from supplied sources and structured rules, but they can still make mistakes. Their use is disclosed in the methodology and on comparison pages.
Commercial independence
Replace.so does not currently accept payment for placement or use sponsorship as a ranking signal. If a commercial relationship, affiliate link, free access, or other material conflict applies to content in the future, it will be disclosed near that content and will not override the published eligibility rules.
Reviews are not guarantees
Inclusion means the available evidence passed the catalog’s stated rules at review time. It is not a security audit, legal opinion, accessibility certification, endorsement of every maintainer decision, or guarantee that the software fits a particular organization.