On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 08:15:11AM -0400, Gordon Tyler wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 7:25 AM, Jelmer Vernooij <jelmer <at> samba.org> wrote:
>
> > > Btw, what is that "(default)" branch that "bzr branches" shows as
> > > being current after the initial git-import?  There's no such branch in
> > > the repo, and .bzr/branches/ directory doesn't have a subdirectory for
> > > it.  Wouldn't it be better if the default were "master"?
> > The (default) branch is what corresponds to HEAD in git. We can't
> > simply name that branch "master" since that would conflict with the
> > actual master branch, which can be different from HEAD.
> As I understand it,  HEAD in a git repo is the ref that points to the
>  "current" or default branch. So, theoretically, it should be pointing to
> an existing ref (branch). So why is it created or listed as a separate
> branch?

HEAD in a git repo is just a ref. It is possible for refs to point at
other refs (a "symbolic" ref). HEAD is usually a symbolic ref, but
this isn't necessarily the case. It can also just point at an
arbitrary revision.