Re: switch requires --detach [[Re: What actually is a branch]]

> Martin <git@mfriebe.de> writes:
> 
> > On 09/07/2021 17:08, Felipe Contreras wrote:
> >> and the fact that
> >> `git switch` expects branches is one of the things that bothers me about
> >> it.
> >
> > Ah, good point.
> >
> > I would word it differently though.
> > "git switch forces the use of --detach if switching to a non branch"
> >
> > Bit of a twist.
> > It's a nice safety for beginners. I remember when I started, I kept
> > ending up detached. And I had no idea what to do next.
> 
> I think it's more because of too technical and thus confusing name for
> it rather than the state itself. In fact this could be described as
> "being on unnamed branch", as if HEAD points to a branch with empty
> name, and is not detached in any sense.
> 
> It's nice that once you are on unnamed branch, nothing actually changes,
> so no any mental shift is needed to get out of this "state". BTW,
> unnamed branch could probably even start to have entries in the reflog.
> 
> Overall, I think Git needs to move into direction of getting rid of
> "detached head" in favor of "unnamed branch" at least at the UI level.