Skip to content

[Docs] Say what stock and the fork share before naming the fork's difference - #8

Merged
rwkeyes merged 1 commit into
dirigo/0.2.12-verifiedfrom
docs/shared-vs-fork
Nov 13, 2026
Merged

rwkeyes merged 1 commit into
dirigo/0.2.12-verifiedfrom
docs/shared-vs-fork

Conversation

@rwkeyes

@rwkeyes rwkeyes commented Nov 13, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

Problem and result

Two statements in the front page implied the fork invented things that both versions share.

  • MTP. The four-engine-decisions list sits under a heading that now carries the fork-vs-stock comparison, so
    "guess, then check" read as the fork's advantage. Both sides run the same engine version (0.1.59) and the same
    draft layer; the fork's only drafting additions are two settings the measurement does not use.
  • The 28.8 GB table. It is not an engine feature at all — it is the model publisher's second GGUF file. Nothing on
    the page said so, which invites the reader to assume we created or modified it.

Related discussion

none — documentation only.

Approach

  1. The section now opens with "Stock Strata v0.2.13 and this fork run the same engine version (0.1.59)", so the
    four bullets read as a description of the engine both versions share rather than of the fork.
  2. After the bullets, a paragraph says it outright: the expert split, the table and guess-then-check are stock
    behaviour, the carry changes how none of them runs — and names the one PLE file the carry does touch
    (ple_parity, the table's self-test, changed to skip when the fixture is absent, not to compute differently).
  3. It then lists what the fork actually adds around drafting — per-request spec=N and spec_window, with
    spec_window: 0 in the measured config and GuideLLM never sending spec — and points at the server-side
    difference that the comparison measures.
  4. The PLE bullet and the glossary now state the table is the model's: publisher's second file, 160 × 320,001,536 at
    IQ4_NL, 28,800,138,240 bytes, read by stock and fork alike, not created or re-encoded by either.

Validation

Passed:

  • The shared-code claim is checked, not asserted: git diff --name-only v0.2.13 3512b4cce511 contains no runtime
    PLE or draft-layer change; the PLE paths in it are src/kernels/ple_parity.cpp and its SYCL twin, and the diff is
    the fixture-missing SKIP (exit 77) plus a reworded string.
  • The table claim is checked: both 0.2.13 arms' configs point --ple-gguf at the same publisher file, and the
    tensor geometry in that file closes to the quoted byte count.
  • Links, anchors and rendering unchanged: no broken relative link, all #anchors resolve, GitHub's Markdown API
    parses 7 tables and 2 images.

Failed:

none observed.

Not run:

  • No measurement or build; text only.

Limits

  • The drafting additions are named but not measured — spec_window was off and spec was never sent, so the page
    still makes no speed claim about them.

Two things read as if the fork invented them.

MTP: the four "why it is fast" bullets were presented under a heading
that now carries a fork-vs-stock comparison, so "guess, then check"
looked like the fork's trick. It is not - both sides run the same engine
version and the same draft layer. The section now says so up front,
states that the carry changes none of the four, and names what the fork
does add around drafting (per-request `spec=N` and `spec_window`, neither
used by the measurement) before pointing at the server-side difference.

The 28.8 GB table: it belongs to the model, not to either engine. The
bullet now says that, the glossary says neither stock nor this fork
creates, modifies or re-encodes it, and the one PLE file the carry does
touch is named - `ple_parity`, the table's self-test, which now skips
instead of failing when the model file is absent.
@rwkeyes
rwkeyes merged commit c13ff7f into dirigo/0.2.12-verified Nov 13, 2026
3 checks passed
@rwkeyes
rwkeyes deleted the docs/shared-vs-fork branch November 13, 2026 17:27
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant