Re: [PATCH] t1503: test rev-parse --verify --quiet with deleted reflogs

David Aguilar [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

quoted

+test_expect_success 'fails silently when using -q with deleted reflogs' '
+	ref=$(git rev-parse HEAD) &&
+	: >.git/logs/refs/test &&
+	git update-ref -m test refs/test "$ref" &&

I'm just curious, why not simply

   git branch test
?

Maybe it's a bad reason, but I wanted to replicate the behavior
that git stash expects -- it writes to a ref outside of
refs/heads/.  I thought it'd be good to exercise that same
machinery since it will involve different code paths.

I think that is a very sensible thing to do.  Another reason to
avoid using "branch" when you care about what "update-ref" does is
that "branch" does more than what "update-ref" does.