What are the pros and cons of having a team work on two active sprints?

Question

git

I have my own opinion on this matter. Therefore, I ask the question as neutrally as possible so as not to influence the answers. I lack aggregation.
1) several people are working on the project
2) the dev development branch implements the tasks of the current sprint (task group 1)
3) the nextFeatures (stage) development branch implements the tasks of the next sprint (task group 2)
4) tasks on almost the same code.
PS: The project team leader decided to show some kind of abnormal loyalty to the customer or management and suggests the team to work on two active sprints at the same time. How to "help" him?

Answer 1

This is profanity.
1. stage - by definition, this is not for new functionality, but for stabilizing the already implemented one (look at the translation of the term). You are either confused, or someone does not understand something.
2. there is no point in parallel sprints, since the goal of a sprint is to deliver a working product. Do you have two different products within the same codebase?
3. it happens that you need to fix bugs in the current release and make features in the new one. If there are not many bugs, then there is a suitable process for this called Scramban. If there are a lot of bugs, then you need to stop producing bugs, clean everything up and then go to Scramban.

Answer 2

cons - have to resolve conflicts. pluses - you can blame inconvenient tasks on a partner.

Answer 3

Plus, you can start working on the tasks of the next sprint without waiting for the end of the current one. For example, if a typical task requires the passage of long phases of work of non-interchangeable specialists.
Cons - the team's focus on the sprint goal is lost.
I would say that such an order indicates that they either do not know how to break tasks into pieces, or there is a clear division of positions, or very different skills (for example, programmers do not test)