On 2009.04.20 11:59:38 -0700, Jakub Narebski wrote: > Björn Steinbrink <B.Steinbrink@xxxxxx> writes: > > > If you go out, and look at a tree lit-up by the evil daystar, branches > > start at the trunk and end at their tip. The trunk isn't part of the > > branch. [...] > > Well, you have to remember that the 'branch' metaphor should not be > taken too literaly; take for example merges which do not have > equivalent in a tree build. True, but that just happened to fit the task-oriented branch view so well, and I wanted the reference to the evil daystar (obviously ;-)). > But if we are talking about literal branches: take a closer loog at > the tip of tree (plant) branch. You can find growong tip there > (apical meristem) where new cells grow. In Git you have 'branches' > (branch heads) where you create new commits... Yeah, see the end of my mail, where I said that git has a mechanism to control where branches grow. Seems to fit :-) > But I agree that there isn't for example true notion of 'trunk' in > git, and this is what allows Git to be truly distributed... Hm, not just no trunk, but also no branches that have a starting point and an end point. In general, you can't say "My branch starts _here_" unless you use the root commit(s) as the starting point, or you apply "extra" knowledge (you know from which other branch this branch forked). Björn -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html