[PATCH] Grammar fixes to "merge" and "patch-id" docs

[PATCH] Grammar fixes to "merge" and "patch-id" docs

[Wincent Colaiuta]

Signed-off-by: Wincent Colaiuta <win@wincent.com>
---
Just a few grammar glitches that caught my eye while
perusing some man pages.

 Documentation/git-merge.txt        |    2 +-
 Documentation/git-patch-id.txt     |    2 +-
 Documentation/merge-strategies.txt |   14 +++++++-------
 3 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/git-merge.txt b/Documentation/git-merge.txt
index cc0d30f..427ad90 100644
--- a/Documentation/git-merge.txt
+++ b/Documentation/git-merge.txt
@@ -41,7 +41,7 @@ include::merge-strategies.txt[]
 
 
 If you tried a merge which resulted in a complex conflicts and
-would want to start over, you can recover with 'git-reset'.
+want to start over, you can recover with 'git-reset'.
 
 CONFIGURATION
 -------------
diff --git a/Documentation/git-patch-id.txt b/Documentation/git-patch-id.txt
index 477785e..253fc0f 100644
--- a/Documentation/git-patch-id.txt
+++ b/Documentation/git-patch-id.txt
@@ -20,7 +20,7 @@ IOW, you can use this thing to look for likely duplicate commits.
 
 When dealing with 'git-diff-tree' output, it takes advantage of
 the fact that the patch is prefixed with the object name of the
-commit, and outputs two 40-byte hexadecimal string.  The first
+commit, and outputs two 40-byte hexadecimal strings.  The first
 string is the patch ID, and the second string is the commit ID.
 This can be used to make a mapping from patch ID to commit ID.
 
diff --git a/Documentation/merge-strategies.txt b/Documentation/merge-strategies.txt
index 1276f85..ee7f754 100644
--- a/Documentation/merge-strategies.txt
+++ b/Documentation/merge-strategies.txt
@@ -3,15 +3,15 @@ MERGE STRATEGIES
 
 resolve::
 	This can only resolve two heads (i.e. the current branch
-	and another branch you pulled from) using 3-way merge
+	and another branch you pulled from) using a 3-way merge
 	algorithm.  It tries to carefully detect criss-cross
 	merge ambiguities and is considered generally safe and
 	fast.
 
 recursive::
-	This can only resolve two heads using 3-way merge
-	algorithm.  When there are more than one common
-	ancestors that can be used for 3-way merge, it creates a
+	This can only resolve two heads using a 3-way merge
+	algorithm.  When there is more than one common
+	ancestor that can be used for 3-way merge, it creates a
 	merged tree of the common ancestors and uses that as
 	the reference tree for the 3-way merge.  This has been
 	reported to result in fewer merge conflicts without
@@ -22,11 +22,11 @@ recursive::
 	pulling or merging one branch.
 
 octopus::
-	This resolves more than two-head case, but refuses to do
-	complex merge that needs manual resolution.  It is
+	This resolves the more than two-heads case, but refuses to do
+	a complex merge that needs manual resolution.  It is
 	primarily meant to be used for bundling topic branch
 	heads together.  This is the default merge strategy when
-	pulling or merging more than one branches.
+	pulling or merging more than one branch.
 
 ours::
 	This resolves any number of heads, but the result of the
-- 
1.6.2.1

Re: [PATCH] Grammar fixes to "merge" and "patch-id" docs

[Junio C Hamano]

Wincent Colaiuta <win@wincent.com> writes:

>  If you tried a merge which resulted in a complex conflicts and
> -would want to start over, you can recover with 'git-reset'.
> +want to start over, you can recover with 'git-reset'.

Reads Ok to me either way...

> diff --git a/Documentation/merge-strategies.txt b/Documentation/merge-strategies.txt
> index 1276f85..ee7f754 100644
> --- a/Documentation/merge-strategies.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/merge-strategies.txt
> @@ -3,15 +3,15 @@ MERGE STRATEGIES
>  
>  resolve::
>  	This can only resolve two heads (i.e. the current branch
> -	and another branch you pulled from) using 3-way merge
> +	and another branch you pulled from) using a 3-way merge
>  	algorithm.  It tries to carefully detect criss-cross

Hmph, would that be an 'a' or 'the'?

>  recursive::
> -	This can only resolve two heads using 3-way merge
> -	algorithm.  When there are more than one common
> -	ancestors that can be used for 3-way merge, it creates a
> +	This can only resolve two heads using a 3-way merge
> +	algorithm.  When there is more than one common
> +	ancestor that can be used for 3-way merge, it creates a

Do you need an article before the latter "3-way merge", perhaps "the"?

> @@ -22,11 +22,11 @@ recursive::
>  	pulling or merging one branch.
>  
>  octopus::
> -	This resolves more than two-head case, but refuses to do
> -	complex merge that needs manual resolution.  It is
> +	This resolves the more than two-heads case, but refuses to do
> +	a complex merge that needs manual resolution.  It is

Perhaps "resolves cases with more than two heads" is easier to read?

Re: [PATCH] Grammar fixes to "merge" and "patch-id" docs

[Wincent Colaiuta]

El 25/3/2009, a las 19:33, Junio C Hamano escribió:

> Wincent Colaiuta <win@wincent.com> writes:
>
>> If you tried a merge which resulted in a complex conflicts and
>> -would want to start over, you can recover with 'git-reset'.
>> +want to start over, you can recover with 'git-reset'.
>
> Reads Ok to me either way...

"tried" is in the past preterit, so the second verb, the one after the  
"and", should be "want" due to concordance. "would want" is not  
actually wrong, but it is bad form. It is a common mistake among non- 
native speaker to use "would" when it's not required in cases like  
this, probably due to confusion with the pattern "If X, I would  
Y" (but note that there's no "and" in that case).

(Speaking as a native English-speaker and part-time English teacher,  
who this very week has been teaching classes about modal verbs like  
"would".)

>> diff --git a/Documentation/merge-strategies.txt b/Documentation/ 
>> merge-strategies.txt
>> index 1276f85..ee7f754 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/merge-strategies.txt
>> +++ b/Documentation/merge-strategies.txt
>> @@ -3,15 +3,15 @@ MERGE STRATEGIES
>>
>> resolve::
>> 	This can only resolve two heads (i.e. the current branch
>> -	and another branch you pulled from) using 3-way merge
>> +	and another branch you pulled from) using a 3-way merge
>> 	algorithm.  It tries to carefully detect criss-cross
>
> Hmph, would that be an 'a' or 'the'?

Doesn't really matter, IMO, but some kind of article is required  
there. If there is literally only one 3-way merge algorithm in  
computer science, then "the" would be best. I chose "a" because I was  
thinking of it as "Git's interpretation of the 3-way merge algorithm".

>> recursive::
>> -	This can only resolve two heads using 3-way merge
>> -	algorithm.  When there are more than one common
>> -	ancestors that can be used for 3-way merge, it creates a
>> +	This can only resolve two heads using a 3-way merge
>> +	algorithm.  When there is more than one common
>> +	ancestor that can be used for 3-way merge, it creates a
>
> Do you need an article before the latter "3-way merge", perhaps "the"?

Probably wouldn't hurt.

>> @@ -22,11 +22,11 @@ recursive::
>> 	pulling or merging one branch.
>>
>> octopus::
>> -	This resolves more than two-head case, but refuses to do
>> -	complex merge that needs manual resolution.  It is
>> +	This resolves the more than two-heads case, but refuses to do
>> +	a complex merge that needs manual resolution.  It is
>
> Perhaps "resolves cases with more than two heads" is easier to read?

Yes, I agree.

Cheers,
Wincent

Re: [PATCH] Grammar fixes to "merge" and "patch-id" docs

[Jeff King]

On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 11:33:52AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:

> Wincent Colaiuta <win@wincent.com> writes:
> 
> >  If you tried a merge which resulted in a complex conflicts and
> > -would want to start over, you can recover with 'git-reset'.
> > +want to start over, you can recover with 'git-reset'.
> 
> Reads Ok to me either way...

Wincent gave a more complete explanation, and I think he is right about
this change. But while reading this I also noticed "... a complex
conflicts ..." in the context line which should be just "complex
conflicts".

-Peff

[PATCH] Grammar fix for "git merge" man page

[Wincent Colaiuta]

As spotted by the eagle eyes of Jeff King.

Signed-off-by: Wincent Colaiuta <win@wincent.com>
---
 Documentation/git-merge.txt |    2 +-
 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/git-merge.txt b/Documentation/git-merge.txt
index 427ad90..c04ae73 100644
--- a/Documentation/git-merge.txt
+++ b/Documentation/git-merge.txt
@@ -40,7 +40,7 @@ include::merge-options.txt[]
 include::merge-strategies.txt[]
 
 
-If you tried a merge which resulted in a complex conflicts and
+If you tried a merge which resulted in complex conflicts and
 want to start over, you can recover with 'git-reset'.
 
 CONFIGURATION
-- 
1.6.2.1