From: "Dale R. Worley" <wor...@alum.mit.edu> Sent: Wednesday, December
12, 2012 5:48 PM
From: "Philip Oakley" <philipoak...@iee.org>
> Another question is this: I believe that the complete repository
> its status lives in the .git directory. So if I move ./.git to
> it has the same effect as if I moved all the normal files into a
> subdirectory of ".". Is that correct?
Essentially yes, you gain an extra level of structure to your content
tree. But test it on a dummy repo first - you will be surprised buy
status messages "help everything's moved..." ;-)
One crucial question is whether the information in the .git directory
contains (in any way) the absolute location of the directory. That
is, if I have a working copy of the project, with its .git directory,
and I move (or copy) the whole directory tree to somewhere else, is
the moved copy a correct Git working-copy-and-.git-directory?
If you move the whole repository (including working directory if it has
one) then you will still have a working repo in the new location. There
are one or two cases where paths are exactly coded, such as some
sub-module locations (places where a URL is recorded), but 99% of all
actions are unaffected.
The git directory doesn't, of itself, know where it is located.