git clone vs cp -R

Question

I want to use an existing project as a starting point for a new project by copying or cloning it.

There are at least two ways of doing this.

Method 1: Copy it.

cp -R /path/to/source /path/to/dest

and

Method 2: Clone it.

git clone /path/to/source

What are the relative advantages and disadvantages of each approach compared to the other? Or do they both produce essentially exactly the same result?

Answer 1

Copying copies the working copy, any untracked files, and any local configuration along with the actual repository.

Cloning doesn't, but it sets up the origin remote with a tracking branch.

Use copying if you want to duplicate your repository so that all remote operations work the same. Use cloning if you want to create a subordinate repository to your original.

Answer 2

This is not strictly an answer to you question, but if you want to start a new project, do you really want to copy all the history, branches, etc from the old project?

If you just want a working template, say to get the structure of the project as a starting point, but it should have no other ties to the original, then clone the repo but delete the .git folder and run git init again to start fresh.