v0 and modular v1 comparison
Scope
This chapter compares the reviewed main tree (v0) with the modular architecture in the reviewed dev tree (v1 architecture). These are divergent development branches—not a linear release history, semantic-version promise, production-readiness statement, or evidence that either source tree is deployed or active in game. The candidates have 16 main-only and 28 dev-only commits after their merge base.
The existing World Contracts pages remain v0/main material. They are not relocated by this comparison.
Executive summary
v0’s active world package uses fixed shared assemblies and dedicated domain objects. v1’s active source is split into core, character, and inventory; v0 packages are retained below contracts/archive/. v1 composes deterministic Entity objects from installed modules and gates lifecycle work through typed, transaction-scoped requests and requirements. That is an incompatible integration model, not a complete port of the archived gameplay surface.
The comparison is source and test review only. Manifests establish only the artifacts they name; neither source presence nor a passing source review proves deployment or runtime behavior. Architecture explains the model; coverage prevents archive code from being mistaken for active v1 code; evidence records limitations and contradictions.
Method and provenance
Every upstream factual link uses one of the immutable commits in this page’s metadata. Review three relationships: recorded v0 to main, recorded v1 to dev, and the pinned tips against each other. The sole cursor is here so child pages cannot drift. The initial review found 26 v0 source modules and 21 v0 Move tests, plus 13 active v1 source modules, 31 v1 Move tests, and 45 archived v1 source modules. Tests and archive paths are not counted as active source coverage.