Oh, that’s valid, and forks could be called “asexual propagation”

Cherry picking from one trunk to another could be called grafting.

There is already pruning.

If there is no AI used, it could be called GMO.

I’m not sure if there is a tree analogy for merging trunks together, however.

Cause git doesn’t work that way. There is no trunk. It’s all branches.

It just bothers me that “master” branch is a misnomer. It’s a hold over from CVS/SVN where there was actually a central authoritative branch. I’m not necessary saying the other reasons don’t have merit, as well.

The best reason is always in the comments

I feel master as in “master copy” is sort of problematic too. Git has no concept of “master” as a “master copy”. All the clones and forks are the same fidelity as the original. It’s a hold over from source control which did have an authoritative repo like SVN/CVS.

They are actually different. Yes has the accent.

Si = if

Sí = yes

True, but so was Windows.

Javascript being disruptive technology is… A take for sure.