[diggan]

> I didn't even know git switch existed, let alone git checkout was considered the old alternative. I feel old.

I don't think "git checkout" is considered the "old alternative", at least not yet. Last time I checked, `switch` is still experimental, I haven't even considered moving away from the workflows/commands I first learned when I picked up Git ~15 years ago. Everything I want to do still works exactly the same (`git checkout` still does the exact same stuff as before), and I'm able to collaborate with everyone else using git, why change workflow then?

[juped]

switch/restore are not experimental in that sense, they're experimental in the sense that they're not guaranteed stable so don't rely on them for scripts or something (I occasionally tell myself I should adopt them and get them stabilized, but then don't do it)

[bicolao]

It was experimental to allow the developers to tweak UI, including breaking backward compatibility if needed. But I left Git shortly after these were added. I guess nobody picked this up to finish the job (even by just removing the experimental status, since nothing has changed for years and I assume nobody complained about them).

[RohMin]

git switch focuses on switching branches while git checkout extends further than that

[diggan]

Right, so for the folks at home who already know and use `git checkout`, no switch needed (no pun intended) as everything already works fine and probably won't be deprecated in the near future.