Re: [PATCH] t6300: avoid creating refs/heads/HEAD

Jeff King [off-list ref] writes:

The "other" stuff could sometimes be useful, I guess. It's not _always_
wrong to do:

  git branch -f @{upstream} foo

It depends on what your @{upstream} resolves to. Switching to just using
interpret_nth_prior_checkout() would break the case when it resolves to
a local branch. I'm not sure if we're OK with that or not. If we want to
keep all the existing cases working, I think we need something like the
"not_in_refs_heads" patch I posted elsewhere.

I haven't seen that patch, but yes, telling the caller if the
returned value is meant to be used inside refs/heads/ is the right
approach and makes it possible for "@{upstream}" (and just "@") to
be handled sensibly in "git branch -m @{that at-mark thing}".