The documentation says that, at the simplest level, I can run either of the following 2 commands to create a new branch (deliberately ignoring the "checkout" command, for this question):

$ git  branch  <newbranchname>

--OR--

$ git  branch  <newbranchname>  <start-point-branch>

I have a gut feeling for the difference(s) but I am so new to this stuff that I am not trusting my gut.

Can you all please explain to me the advantages & disadvantages of either including or not including the "start-point-branch" at the end of that command line?

CodePudding user response：

Without the extra argument, the newly created branch will branch out from the current HEAD. With the extra argument, it will branch out from there.

I don't think you can really discuss the advantages or disadvantages of including this argument - you should branch out from the correct commit. Once branched out, git retains no "memory" of how this branch was created. In other words, git branch new_branch some_starting_point will have the same end result as git checkout some_starting_point && git branch new_branch.

CodePudding user response：

If you want to then use the branch created from current HEAD or for another commit, do not use the confusing and obsolete checkout command.

Use git switch:

git switch [<options>] (-c|-C) <new-branch> [<start-point>]

Create a new branch named <new-branch> starting at <start-point> before switching to the branch. This is a convenient shortcut for:

$ git branch <new-branch>
$ git switch <new-branch>

If you omit the start point, you remain at current HEAD, but in a new branch, and can start working right away.
But you can create (and switch to) a new branch from an existing one by adding as a starting point the branch name from which you want to work.