• aquovie@lemmy.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      17 days ago

      I’ll never understand why we didn’t just go back to saying “trunk”.

      • zarkanian@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        17 days ago

        “Trunk” is nice because it fits with “branch” in the tree metaphor, but “main” does have fewer letters.

        • Lifter@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          17 days ago

          Yep, the metaphor would be good if git was a tree but kt isn’t. It’s very rare to have a real tree branch merge back into the trunk. Would it even still be called a branch after merging?

          • aquovie@lemmy.cafe
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            16 days ago

            If it’s not a tree, why call it a branch? Maybe branch doesn’t make any sense either. Maybe none of this makes any sense! Oh my God, what are we even doing here?!?! Ahhhhhhhhhhhh!

          • Cort@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            16 days ago

            It’s very rare to have a real tree branch merge back into the trunk.

            Not rare, but uncommon. Not sure if there’s a Lemmy equivalent but r/treessuckingonthings shows trunks absorbing all sorts of things including branches