I don’t think hg has the concept of unnamed heads in any sort of acceptable manner. You can have 2 heads with the same branch name, which I suppose is called an “unnamed head” but your team will berate you if you force push an unnamed head. (You can’t push an unnamed head without force. Using force almost always means you shouldn’t do whatever you’re doing) when git encourages using ‘force’ I say a silent prayer
In a way, this is backwards. hg is and has always been totally fine with multiple unnamed heads; git is the one that insists that topological heads have some ref pointing at them.
But I agree with your basic point. Unnamed heads in git and unnamed heads in hg are not treated the same, and could be easy for tools to mix up. (I hadn't realized that this was even possible in git??)
