• aquovie@lemmy.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      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
        12
        ·
        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
          3
          ·
          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?

          • 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

            • Lifter@discuss.tchncs.de
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              16 days ago

              Yes, this is why I chose not to say that it was impossible.

              Perhaps the mathematical definition of a tree is wrong in stating there should be not loops, or should change to another metaphor.

              Hairs can split but never merges back again. Perhaps a split hair instead of a branch? We still trim or prune the leaves ends. What do you call the “trunk” of a hair?

              Edit: formatting