Kevin Buckley <Kevin.Buckley@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > git init > > initialises a Git repository, however, the only thing that changes > as a result is that a .git directory has been created, ergo, the > .git directory is the repository. Well, there is a distinction between "non-bare" and "bare" repository, so it is not exactly _wrong_ per-se to include the working tree portion of a non-bare repository as part of the repository created when you run "git clone", i.e. it is not a crime to say "please run 'git clone' to get a new repository to work in". Often we do need to single out the things under .git/ in a non-bare repository when explaining certain features of Git, and need to clarify if it is not clear in the context (e.g. "the .git repository proper in the result of such a non-bare 'git clone'"). It is nothing new in inter-human communication. If there is a use of word "repository" in our documentation where it is not clear if the repository proper or the combination of both working tree and the repository prper is meant, you may want to propose a clarification patch. Thanks.
