6 ms·
Title should be updated to match the original: "Pest" v. 0xFE "vs." being an abbreviation for versus carries an entirely different meaning than the intended ve
by hermitdev 5y ago
Title should be updated to match the original: "Pest" v. 0xFE
"vs." being an abbreviation for versus carries an entirely different meaning than the intended version.
- saurik 5y agoFWIW, I would have read "v." the same, as "v." is also an abbreviation--mostly used in legal documents and court cases--for versus.
- kazinator 5y agoLooks like the versions count down toward zero. Pest v. 0xFF is an older article by several days.
- asciilifeform 5y agoThis is correct, and is described in the article ("Kelvin versioning".) The concept is not original to the author.
- unwind 5y agoIt's supposed to mean "version"? The post seems to be the successor/continuation of "Pest v. 0xFF", replacing it by ... decreasing the version number? Then it starts off saying that you're going to need a "vtree", and for that obviously you need a "V-tron" and that's about where I gave up. It was like trying to read something from a parallel world.
- nerdponx 5y agoApparently this is something related to using the Bitcoin blockchain to produce a cryptographically verifiable sequence/tree/dag(?) of revisions. Like Git but more crypto-ey.
- asciilifeform 5y ago"V" is a very simple versioned publication system (there's an explanatory link in the article.) Vpatches are backwards-compatible with ordinary gnupatch. (can simply execute "patch -p0 < nameofpatch" for the sequence.) "V" has nothing directly to do with Bitcoin.
- dafoex 5y agoIn all brutal honesty I would have read "v." as versus, whereas just "v" as in "v 4.2.0" would be version.