I love this article and the grapglhics (I’m a visual guy ☺️).

I really wish they hadn’t inherited some terms, like branch, when they made git. They used it because it was an established term going back to the ancient history of source control but it creates so much confusion. Should have been “labels”.

I know that “branch” helps intuitively and visually when it’s actually an offshoot with one root and a dangling tip, like an actual tree branch… but the analogy fails horribly when they also use “branch” for all the labels in the middle of the bush, that aren’t free dangling offshoots. At the very least they should have reserved “branch” for those type of offshoots and use “labels” for the actual names. And say things like “that’s a branch with a label on top” or “that’s not a branch anymore, I tied it back”.

It doesn’t help that the git history is not a tree, it’s a directional graph.