Re: erratic behavior commit --allow-empty

Johannes Sixt [off-list ref] writes:

Why don't you use a different commit message to ensure that there is a
difference between the commits?

That sounds like a workaround, and unnecessary one at that, as it is
entirely unclear why there _needs_ to be a different commit.

Perhaps OP fears that the orphan branch "foo" in his example,
because it happens to point at the same commit object as the
"master", will not stay the same and follow along the advancement of
"master" if some new commits are added to it, and that is the reason
he wants a different commit?

Of course, starting from "master" and "foo" pointing at the same
commit (or different commit, for that matter), "foo" won't change if
you commit on "master", so that fear is unnecessary.