• aquovie@lemmy.cafe
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    24 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
      ·
      24 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
        ·
        24 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
          ·
          23 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
          ·
          23 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