[PATCH v2 0/2] user-manual: use standarized quoting

[PATCH v2 0/2] user-manual: use standarized quoting

[Felipe Contreras]

Hi,

This is a big patch that was sent before, but now I'm explaining my rationale
for the quoting style I used. I noticed a few deviations on my own rules, so I
fixed them.

It's exactly the same as the previous, but since the server silently dropped
the mail, I splitted the patch in 2.

What do you think?

Felipe Contreras (2):
  user-manual: general quoting improvements (p1)
  user-manual: general quoting improvements (p2)

 Documentation/user-manual.txt |  884 ++++++++++++++++++++--------------------
 1 files changed, 442 insertions(+), 442 deletions(-)

[PATCH v2 1/2] user-manual: general quoting improvements (p1)

[Felipe Contreras]

This standarizes the way quotes are handled following semantic rules,
that make the final text easier to read.

Here are the general rules:

 * A command (something that the user must type), goes in backticks. So
   that the final text appears in monospaced text. e.g. `git clone
   <repo>`

 * A common concept (or git lingo), also goes in backticks. So that it
   appears uniquely different from the rest of the text. e.g. `HEAD`

 * An example (something that can be easily replaced), goes into
   typewriter quotes. The final text is not formatted further, so they
   still appear as typewriter quotes. e.g. "linux-2.6"

 * A text that can be confused with normal text also goes into
   typewriter quotes. e.g. "path/to/file" "A"

 * Text that needs to be emphasized goes in single typewriter quotes. So
   that it's not confused as normal text. e.g. we often just use the
   term 'branch'.

 * Something that needs proper quotation goes into proper double quotes.
   So that it gets a dramatic effect, as in sombody is using his four
   quoting fingers. e.g. ``the index''

 * Something that needs strong emphasis so that the reader can't
   possibly miss it goes enclosed in asterisks. e.g. *not* tracking

These rules are not automatic, which one to use depends on the context,
and often they can be used together. For example, consider this:

	The branch 'test' is short for '"refs/heads/test"'

In this case we want to highligh 'test' and 'refs/heads/test' so they go
in single typewriter quotes, but also, we want to make clear the full
refname is not confused as multiple words, so it goes inside double
typewriter quotes.

Also, sometimes a text can be both a command, and an example, but only
one quoting format must be chosen.

Signed-off-by: Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>
---
 Documentation/user-manual.txt |  426 ++++++++++++++++++++--------------------
 1 files changed, 213 insertions(+), 213 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/user-manual.txt b/Documentation/user-manual.txt
index b169836..8ab8968 100644
--- a/Documentation/user-manual.txt
+++ b/Documentation/user-manual.txt
@@ -19,7 +19,7 @@ Further chapters cover more specialized topics.
 
 Comprehensive reference documentation is available through the man
 pages, or linkgit:git-help[1] command.  For example, for the command
-"git clone <repo>", you can either use:
+`git clone <repo>`, you can either use:
 
 ------------------------------------------------
 $ man git-clone
@@ -66,11 +66,11 @@ $ git clone git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git
 The initial clone may be time-consuming for a large project, but you
 will only need to clone once.
 
-The clone command creates a new directory named after the project ("git"
-or "linux-2.6" in the examples above).  After you cd into this
+The clone command creates a new directory named after the project ('git'
+or 'linux-2.6' in the examples above).  After you cd into this
 directory, you will see that it contains a copy of the project files,
 called the <<def_working_tree,working tree>>, together with a special
-top-level directory named ".git", which contains all the information
+top-level directory named `.git`, which contains all the information
 about the history of the project.
 
 [[how-to-check-out]]
@@ -98,7 +98,7 @@ $ git branch
 ------------------------------------------------
 
 A freshly cloned repository contains a single branch head, by default
-named "master", with the working directory initialized to the state of
+named 'master', with the working directory initialized to the state of
 the project referred to by that branch head.
 
 Most projects also use <<def_tag,tags>>.  Tags, like heads, are
@@ -130,7 +130,7 @@ $ git checkout -b new v2.6.13
 ------------------------------------------------
 
 The working directory then reflects the contents that the project had
-when it was tagged v2.6.13, and linkgit:git-branch[1] shows two
+when it was tagged 'v2.6.13', and linkgit:git-branch[1] shows two
 branches, with an asterisk marking the currently checked-out branch:
 
 ------------------------------------------------
@@ -140,7 +140,7 @@ $ git branch
 ------------------------------------------------
 
 If you decide that you'd rather see version 2.6.17, you can modify
-the current branch to point at v2.6.17 instead, with
+the current branch to point at 'v2.6.17' instead, with
 
 ------------------------------------------------
 $ git reset --hard v2.6.17
@@ -187,8 +187,8 @@ index 65898fa..b002dc6 100644
 As you can see, a commit shows who made the latest change, what they
 did, and why.
 
-Every commit has a 40-hexdigit id, sometimes called the "object name" or the
-"SHA-1 id", shown on the first line of the "git show" output.  You can usually
+Every commit has a 40-hexdigit id, sometimes called the 'object name' or the
+"SHA1-1 id", shown on the first line of the `git show` output.  You can usually
 refer to a commit by a shorter name, such as a tag or a branch name, but this
 longer name can also be useful.  Most importantly, it is a globally unique
 name for this commit: so if you tell somebody else the object name (for
@@ -213,26 +213,26 @@ beginning of the project.
 
 However, the commits do not form a simple list; git allows lines of
 development to diverge and then reconverge, and the point where two
-lines of development reconverge is called a "merge".  The commit
+lines of development reconverge is called a 'merge'.  The commit
 representing a merge can therefore have more than one parent, with
 each parent representing the most recent commit on one of the lines
 of development leading to that point.
 
 The best way to see how this works is using the linkgit:gitk[1]
-command; running gitk now on a git repository and looking for merge
+command; running `gitk` now on a git repository and looking for merge
 commits will help understand how the git organizes history.
 
-In the following, we say that commit X is "reachable" from commit Y
-if commit X is an ancestor of commit Y.  Equivalently, you could say
-that Y is a descendant of X, or that there is a chain of parents
-leading from commit Y to commit X.
+In the following, we say that commit 'X' is 'reachable' from commit 'Y'
+if commit 'X' is an ancestor of commit 'Y'.  Equivalently, you could say
+that 'Y' is a descendant of 'X', or that there is a chain of parents
+leading from commit 'Y' to commit 'X'.
 
 [[history-diagrams]]
 Understanding history: History diagrams
 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 
 We will sometimes represent git history using diagrams like the one
-below.  Commits are shown as "o", and the links between them with
+below.  Commits are shown as '"o"', and the links between them with
 lines drawn with - / and \.  Time goes left to right:
 
 
@@ -244,22 +244,22 @@ lines drawn with - / and \.  Time goes left to right:
          o--o--o <-- Branch B
 ................................................
 
-If we need to talk about a particular commit, the character "o" may
+If we need to talk about a particular commit, the character '"o"' may
 be replaced with another letter or number.
 
 [[what-is-a-branch]]
 Understanding history: What is a branch?
 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 
-When we need to be precise, we will use the word "branch" to mean a line
-of development, and "branch head" (or just "head") to mean a reference
+When we need to be precise, we will use the word 'branch' to mean a line
+of development, and 'branch head' (or just 'head') to mean a reference
 to the most recent commit on a branch.  In the example above, the branch
-head named "A" is a pointer to one particular commit, but we refer to
+head named '"A"' is a pointer to one particular commit, but we refer to
 the line of three commits leading up to that point as all being part of
-"branch A".
+'"branch A"'.
 
 However, when no confusion will result, we often just use the term
-"branch" both for branches and for branch heads.
+'branch' both for branches and for branch heads.
 
 [[manipulating-branches]]
 Manipulating branches
@@ -271,14 +271,14 @@ a summary of the commands:
 git branch::
 	list all branches
 git branch <branch>::
-	create a new branch named <branch>, referencing the same
+	create a new branch named '<branch>', referencing the same
 	point in history as the current branch
 git branch <branch> <start-point>::
-	create a new branch named <branch>, referencing
-	<start-point>, which may be specified any way you like,
+	create a new branch named '<branch>', referencing
+	'<start-point>', which may be specified any way you like,
 	including using a branch name or a tag name
 git branch -d <branch>::
-	delete the branch <branch>; if the branch you are deleting
+	delete the branch '<branch>'; if the branch you are deleting
 	points to a commit which is not reachable from the current
 	branch, this command will fail with a warning.
 git branch -D <branch>::
@@ -288,14 +288,14 @@ git branch -D <branch>::
 	case it is safe to use this command to force git to delete
 	the branch.
 git checkout <branch>::
-	make the current branch <branch>, updating the working
-	directory to reflect the version referenced by <branch>
+	make the current branch '<branch>', updating the working
+	directory to reflect the version referenced by '<branch>'
 git checkout -b <new> <start-point>::
-	create a new branch <new> referencing <start-point>, and
+	create a new branch '<new>' referencing '<start-point>', and
 	check it out.
 
-The special symbol "HEAD" can always be used to refer to the current
-branch.  In fact, git uses a file named "HEAD" in the .git directory to
+The special symbol `HEAD` can always be used to refer to the current
+branch.  In fact, git uses a file named `HEAD` in the `.git` directory to
 remember which branch is current:
 
 ------------------------------------------------
@@ -320,8 +320,8 @@ If you want to create a new branch from this checkout, you may do so
 HEAD is now at 427abfa... Linux v2.6.17
 ------------------------------------------------
 
-The HEAD then refers to the SHA-1 of the commit instead of to a branch,
-and git branch shows that you are no longer on a branch:
+The `HEAD` then refers to the `SHA-1` of the commit instead of to a branch,
+and `git branch` shows that you are no longer on a branch:
 
 ------------------------------------------------
 $ cat .git/HEAD
@@ -331,7 +331,7 @@ $ git branch
   master
 ------------------------------------------------
 
-In this case we say that the HEAD is "detached".
+In this case we say that the `HEAD` is 'detached'.
 
 This is an easy way to check out a particular version without having to
 make up a name for the new branch.   You can still create a new branch
@@ -341,11 +341,11 @@ make up a name for the new branch.   You can still create a new branch
 Examining branches from a remote repository
 -------------------------------------------
 
-The "master" branch that was created at the time you cloned is a copy
-of the HEAD in the repository that you cloned from.  That repository
+The `master` branch that was created at the time you cloned is a copy
+of the `HEAD` in the repository that you cloned from.  That repository
 may also have had other branches, though, and your local repository
 keeps branches which track each of those remote branches, which you
-can view using the "-r" option to linkgit:git-branch[1]:
+can view using the `-r` option to linkgit:git-branch[1]:
 
 ------------------------------------------------
 $ git branch -r
@@ -359,14 +359,14 @@ $ git branch -r
   origin/todo
 ------------------------------------------------
 
-You cannot check out these remote-tracking branches, but you can
+You cannot check out these 'remote-tracking' branches, but you can
 examine them on a branch of your own, just as you would a tag:
 
 ------------------------------------------------
 $ git checkout -b my-todo-copy origin/todo
 ------------------------------------------------
 
-Note that the name "origin" is just the name that git uses by default
+Note that the name 'origin' is just the name that git uses by default
 to refer to the repository that you cloned from.
 
 [[how-git-stores-references]]
@@ -375,42 +375,42 @@ Naming branches, tags, and other references
 
 Branches, remote-tracking branches, and tags are all references to
 commits.  All references are named with a slash-separated path name
-starting with "refs"; the names we've been using so far are actually
+starting with 'refs'; the names we've been using so far are actually
 shorthand:
 
-	- The branch "test" is short for "refs/heads/test".
-	- The tag "v2.6.18" is short for "refs/tags/v2.6.18".
-	- "origin/master" is short for "refs/remotes/origin/master".
+	- The branch 'test' is short for '"refs/heads/test"'.
+	- The tag 'v2.6.18' is short for '"refs/tags/v2.6.18"'.
+	- 'origin/master' is short for '"refs/remotes/origin/master"'.
 
 The full name is occasionally useful if, for example, there ever
 exists a tag and a branch with the same name.
 
-(Newly created refs are actually stored in the .git/refs directory,
+(Newly created refs are actually stored in the `.git/refs` directory,
 under the path given by their name.  However, for efficiency reasons
 they may also be packed together in a single file; see
 linkgit:git-pack-refs[1]).
 
-As another useful shortcut, the "HEAD" of a repository can be referred
-to just using the name of that repository.  So, for example, "origin"
-is usually a shortcut for the HEAD branch in the repository "origin".
+As another useful shortcut, the `HEAD` of a repository can be referred
+to just using the name of that repository.  So, for example, '"origin"'
+is usually a shortcut for the `HEAD` branch in the repository '"origin"'.
 
 For the complete list of paths which git checks for references, and
 the order it uses to decide which to choose when there are multiple
-references with the same shorthand name, see the "SPECIFYING
-REVISIONS" section of linkgit:git-rev-parse[1].
+references with the same shorthand name, see the '"SPECIFYING
+REVISIONS"' section of linkgit:git-rev-parse[1].
 
 [[Updating-a-repository-With-git-fetch]]
-Updating a repository with git fetch
+Updating a repository with `git fetch`
 ------------------------------------
 
 Eventually the developer cloned from will do additional work in her
 repository, creating new commits and advancing the branches to point
 at the new commits.
 
-The command "git fetch", with no arguments, will update all of the
+The command `git fetch`, with no arguments, will update all of the
 remote-tracking branches to the latest version found in her
 repository.  It will not touch any of your own branches--not even the
-"master" branch that was created for you on clone.
+`master` branch that was created for you on clone.
 
 [[fetching-branches]]
 Fetching branches from other repositories
@@ -427,7 +427,7 @@ $ git fetch linux-nfs
 -------------------------------------------------
 
 New remote-tracking branches will be stored under the shorthand name
-that you gave "git remote add", in this case linux-nfs:
+that you gave `git remote add`, in this case "linux-nfs":
 
 -------------------------------------------------
 $ git branch -r
@@ -435,10 +435,10 @@ linux-nfs/master
 origin/master
 -------------------------------------------------
 
-If you run "git fetch <remote>" later, the tracking branches for the
-named <remote> will be updated.
+If you run `git fetch <remote>` later, the tracking branches for the
+named '<remote>' will be updated.
 
-If you examine the file .git/config, you will see that git has added
+If you examine the file `.git/config`, you will see that git has added
 a new stanza:
 
 -------------------------------------------------
@@ -451,8 +451,8 @@ $ cat .git/config
 -------------------------------------------------
 
 This is what causes git to track the remote's branches; you may modify
-or delete these configuration options by editing .git/config with a
-text editor.  (See the "CONFIGURATION FILE" section of
+or delete these configuration options by editing `.git/config` with a
+text editor.  (See the '"CONFIGURATION FILE"' section of
 linkgit:git-config[1] for details.)
 
 [[exploring-git-history]]
@@ -461,7 +461,7 @@ Exploring git history
 
 Git is best thought of as a tool for storing the history of a
 collection of files.  It does this by storing compressed snapshots of
-the contents of a file hierarchy, together with "commits" which show
+the contents of a file hierarchy, together with commits which show
 the relationships between these snapshots.
 
 Git provides extremely flexible and fast tools for exploring the
@@ -474,8 +474,8 @@ commit that introduced a bug into a project.
 How to use bisect to find a regression
 --------------------------------------
 
-Suppose version 2.6.18 of your project worked, but the version at
-"master" crashes.  Sometimes the best way to find the cause of such a
+Suppose version '2.6.18' of your project worked, but the version at
+'master' crashes.  Sometimes the best way to find the cause of such a
 regression is to perform a brute-force search through the project's
 history to find the particular commit that caused the problem.  The
 linkgit:git-bisect[1] command can help you do this:
@@ -488,10 +488,10 @@ Bisecting: 3537 revisions left to test after this
 [65934a9a028b88e83e2b0f8b36618fe503349f8e] BLOCK: Make USB storage depend on SCSI rather than selecting it [try #6]
 -------------------------------------------------
 
-If you run "git branch" at this point, you'll see that git has
-temporarily moved you in "(no branch)". HEAD is now detached from any
-branch and points directly to a commit (with commit id 65934...) that
-is reachable from "master" but not from v2.6.18. Compile and test it,
+If you run `git branch` at this point, you'll see that git has
+temporarily moved you to '"(no branch)"'. `HEAD` is now detached from any
+branch and points directly to a commit (with commit id '65934...') that
+is reachable from 'master' but not from 'v2.6.18'. Compile and test it,
 and see whether it crashes. Assume it does crash. Then:
 
 -------------------------------------------------
@@ -526,19 +526,19 @@ run
 $ git bisect visualize
 -------------------------------------------------
 
-which will run gitk and label the commit it chose with a marker that
-says "bisect".  Choose a safe-looking commit nearby, note its commit
+which will run `gitk` and label the commit it chose with a marker that
+says '"bisect"'.  Choose a safe-looking commit nearby, note its commit
 id, and check it out with:
 
 -------------------------------------------------
 $ git reset --hard fb47ddb2db...
 -------------------------------------------------
 
-then test, run "bisect good" or "bisect bad" as appropriate, and
+then test, run '"bisect good"' or '"bisect bad"' as appropriate, and
 continue.
 
-Instead of "git bisect visualize" and then "git reset --hard
-fb47ddb2db...", you might just want to tell git that you want to skip
+Instead of '"git bisect visualize"' and then '"git reset --hard
+fb47ddb2db..."', you might just want to tell git that you want to skip
 the current commit:
 
 -------------------------------------------------
@@ -550,8 +550,8 @@ bad one between some first skipped commits and a later bad commit.
 
 There are also ways to automate the bisecting process if you have a
 test script that can tell a good from a bad commit. See
-linkgit:git-bisect[1] for more information about this and other "git
-bisect" features.
+linkgit:git-bisect[1] for more information about this and other `git
+bisect` features.
 
 [[naming-commits]]
 Naming commits
@@ -567,7 +567,7 @@ We have seen several ways of naming commits already:
 	  <<how-git-stores-references,references>>).
 	- HEAD: refers to the head of the current branch
 
-There are many more; see the "SPECIFYING REVISIONS" section of the
+There are many more; see the '"SPECIFYING REVISIONS"' section of the
 linkgit:git-rev-parse[1] man page for the complete list of ways to
 name revisions.  Some examples:
 
@@ -580,7 +580,7 @@ $ git show HEAD~4   # the great-great-grandparent
 -------------------------------------------------
 
 Recall that merge commits may have more than one parent; by default,
-^ and ~ follow the first parent listed in the commit, but you can
+'^' and '~' follow the first parent listed in the commit, but you can
 also choose:
 
 -------------------------------------------------
@@ -588,24 +588,24 @@ $ git show HEAD^1   # show the first parent of HEAD
 $ git show HEAD^2   # show the second parent of HEAD
 -------------------------------------------------
 
-In addition to HEAD, there are several other special names for
+In addition to `HEAD`, there are several other special names for
 commits:
 
 Merges (to be discussed later), as well as operations such as
 `git reset`, which change the currently checked-out commit, generally
-set ORIG_HEAD to the value HEAD had before the current operation.
+set `ORIG_HEAD` to the value `HEAD` had before the current operation.
 
 The `git fetch` operation always stores the head of the last fetched
-branch in FETCH_HEAD.  For example, if you run `git fetch` without
+branch in `FETCH_HEAD`.  For example, if you run `git fetch` without
 specifying a local branch as the target of the operation
 
 -------------------------------------------------
 $ git fetch git://example.com/proj.git theirbranch
 -------------------------------------------------
 
-the fetched commits will still be available from FETCH_HEAD.
+the fetched commits will still be available from `FETCH_HEAD`.
 
-When we discuss merges we'll also see the special name MERGE_HEAD,
+When we discuss merges we'll also see the special name `MERGE_HEAD`,
 which refers to the other branch that we're merging in to the current
 branch.
 
@@ -629,9 +629,9 @@ running
 $ git tag stable-1 1b2e1d63ff
 -------------------------------------------------
 
-You can use stable-1 to refer to the commit 1b2e1d63ff.
+You can use 'stable-1' to refer to the commit '1b2e1d63ff'.
 
-This creates a "lightweight" tag.  If you would also like to include a
+This creates a 'lightweight' tag.  If you would also like to include a
 comment with the tag, and possibly sign it cryptographically, then you
 should create a tag object instead; see the linkgit:git-tag[1] man page
 for details.
@@ -658,22 +658,22 @@ $ git log -S'foo()'	# commits which add or remove any file data
 -------------------------------------------------
 
 And of course you can combine all of these; the following finds
-commits since v2.5 which touch the Makefile or any file under fs:
+commits since 'v2.5' which touch the 'Makefile' or any file under 'fs':
 
 -------------------------------------------------
 $ git log v2.5.. Makefile fs/
 -------------------------------------------------
 
-You can also ask git log to show patches:
+You can also ask `git log` to show patches:
 
 -------------------------------------------------
 $ git log -p
 -------------------------------------------------
 
-See the "--pretty" option in the linkgit:git-log[1] man page for more
+See the `--pretty` option in the linkgit:git-log[1] man page for more
 display options.
 
-Note that git log starts with the most recent commit and works
+Note that `git log` starts with the most recent commit and works
 backwards through the parents; however, since git history can contain
 multiple independent lines of development, the particular order that
 commits are listed in may be somewhat arbitrary.
@@ -731,15 +731,15 @@ Examples
 Counting the number of commits on a branch
 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 
-Suppose you want to know how many commits you've made on "mybranch"
-since it diverged from "origin":
+Suppose you want to know how many commits you've made on '"mybranch"'
+since it diverged from '"origin"':
 
 -------------------------------------------------
 $ git log --pretty=oneline origin..mybranch | wc -l
 -------------------------------------------------
 
 Alternatively, you may often see this sort of thing done with the
-lower-level command linkgit:git-rev-list[1], which just lists the SHA-1's
+lower-level command linkgit:git-rev-list[1], which just lists the `SHA-1s`
 of all the given commits:
 
 -------------------------------------------------
@@ -769,7 +769,7 @@ $ git rev-list master
 e05db0fd4f31dde7005f075a84f96b360d05984b
 -------------------------------------------------
 
-Or you could recall that the ... operator selects all commits
+Or you could recall that the '"..."' operator selects all commits
 contained reachable from either one reference or the other but not
 both: so
 
@@ -783,15 +783,15 @@ will return no commits when the two branches are equal.
 Find first tagged version including a given fix
 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 
-Suppose you know that the commit e05db0fd fixed a certain problem.
+Suppose you know that the commit 'e05db0fd' fixed a certain problem.
 You'd like to find the earliest tagged release that contains that
 fix.
 
 Of course, there may be more than one answer--if the history branched
-after commit e05db0fd, then there could be multiple "earliest" tagged
+after commit 'e05db0fd', then there could be multiple earliest tagged
 releases.
 
-You could just visually inspect the commits since e05db0fd:
+You could just visually inspect the commits since 'e05db0fd':
 
 -------------------------------------------------
 $ gitk e05db0fd..
@@ -827,8 +827,8 @@ e05db0fd4f31dde7005f075a84f96b360d05984b
 
 The merge-base command finds a common ancestor of the given commits,
 and always returns one or the other in the case where one is a
-descendant of the other; so the above output shows that e05db0fd
-actually is an ancestor of v1.5.0-rc1.
+descendant of the other; so the above output shows that 'e05db0fd'
+actually is an ancestor of 'v1.5.0-rc1'.
 
 Alternatively, note that
 
@@ -836,8 +836,8 @@ Alternatively, note that
 $ git log v1.5.0-rc1..e05db0fd
 -------------------------------------------------
 
-will produce empty output if and only if v1.5.0-rc1 includes e05db0fd,
-because it outputs only commits that are not reachable from v1.5.0-rc1.
+will produce empty output if and only if 'v1.5.0-rc1' includes 'e05db0fd',
+because it outputs only commits that are not reachable from 'v1.5.0-rc1'.
 
 As yet another alternative, the linkgit:git-show-branch[1] command lists
 the commits reachable from its arguments with a display on the left-hand
@@ -861,15 +861,15 @@ then search for a line that looks like
 available
 -------------------------------------------------
 
-Which shows that e05db0fd is reachable from itself, from v1.5.0-rc1, and
-from v1.5.0-rc2, but not from v1.5.0-rc0.
+Which shows that 'e05db0fd' is reachable from itself, from 'v1.5.0-rc1', and
+from 'v1.5.0-rc2', but not from 'v1.5.0-rc0'.
 
 [[showing-commits-unique-to-a-branch]]
 Showing commits unique to a given branch
 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 
 Suppose you would like to see all the commits reachable from the branch
-head named "master" but not from any other head in your repository.
+head named '"master"' but not from any other head in your repository.
 
 We can list all the heads in this repository with
 linkgit:git-show-ref[1]:
@@ -883,7 +883,7 @@ a07157ac624b2524a059a3414e99f6f44bebc1e7 refs/heads/master
 1e87486ae06626c2f31eaa63d26fc0fd646c8af2 refs/heads/tutorial-fixes
 -------------------------------------------------
 
-We can get just the branch-head names, and remove "master", with
+We can get just the branch-head names, and remove 'master', with
 the help of the standard utilities cut and grep:
 
 -------------------------------------------------
@@ -894,7 +894,7 @@ refs/heads/tutorial-2
 refs/heads/tutorial-fixes
 -------------------------------------------------
 
-And then we can ask to see all the commits reachable from master
+And then we can ask to see all the commits reachable from 'master'
 but not from these other heads:
 
 -------------------------------------------------
@@ -909,7 +909,7 @@ commits reachable from some head but not from any tag in the repository:
 $ gitk $( git show-ref --heads ) --not  $( git show-ref --tags )
 -------------------------------------------------
 
-(See linkgit:git-rev-parse[1] for explanations of commit-selecting
+(See linkgit:git-rev-parse[1] for explanations of 'commit-selecting'
 syntax such as `--not`.)
 
 [[making-a-release]]
@@ -923,8 +923,8 @@ any version of a project; for example:
 $ git archive --format=tar --prefix=project/ HEAD | gzip >latest.tar.gz
 -------------------------------------------------
 
-will use HEAD to produce a tar archive in which each filename is
-preceded by "project/".
+will use `HEAD` to produce a tar archive in which each filename is
+preceded by '"project/"'.
 
 If you're releasing a new version of a software project, you may want
 to simultaneously make a changelog to include in the release
@@ -937,7 +937,7 @@ then running:
 $ release-script 2.6.12 2.6.13-rc6 2.6.13-rc7
 -------------------------------------------------
 
-where release-script is a shell script that looks like:
+where 'release-script' is a shell script that looks like:
 
 -------------------------------------------------
 #!/bin/sh
@@ -982,7 +982,7 @@ Telling git your name
 
 Before creating any commits, you should introduce yourself to git.  The
 easiest way to do so is to make sure the following lines appear in a
-file named .gitconfig in your home directory:
+file named `.gitconfig` in your home directory:
 
 ------------------------------------------------
 [user]
@@ -990,7 +990,7 @@ file named .gitconfig in your home directory:
 	email = you@yourdomain.example.com
 ------------------------------------------------
 
-(See the "CONFIGURATION FILE" section of linkgit:git-config[1] for
+(See the '"CONFIGURATION FILE"' section of linkgit:git-config[1] for
 details on the configuration file.)
 
 
@@ -1031,11 +1031,11 @@ Creating a new commit takes three steps:
 In practice, you can interleave and repeat steps 1 and 2 as many
 times as you want: in order to keep track of what you want committed
 at step 3, git maintains a snapshot of the tree's contents in a
-special staging area called "the index."
+special staging area called ``the index''.
 
 At the beginning, the content of the index will be identical to
-that of the HEAD.  The command "git diff --cached", which shows
-the difference between the HEAD and the index, should therefore
+that of the `HEAD`.  The command '"git diff --cached"', which shows
+the difference between the `HEAD` and the `index`, should therefore
 produce no output at that point.
 
 Modifying the index is easy:
@@ -1064,7 +1064,7 @@ After each step you can verify that
 $ git diff --cached
 -------------------------------------------------
 
-always shows the difference between the HEAD and the index file--this
+always shows the difference between the `HEAD` and the index file--this
 is what you'd commit if you created the commit now--and that
 
 -------------------------------------------------
@@ -1116,7 +1116,7 @@ $ git status	    # a brief per-file summary of the above.
 You can also use linkgit:git-gui[1] to create commits, view changes in
 the index and the working tree files, and individually select diff hunks
 for inclusion in the index (by right-clicking on the diff hunk and
-choosing "Stage Hunk For Commit").
+choosing '"Stage Hunk For Commit"').
 
 [[creating-good-commit-messages]]
 Creating good commit messages
@@ -1126,22 +1126,22 @@ Though not required, it's a good idea to begin the commit message
 with a single short (less than 50 character) line summarizing the
 change, followed by a blank line and then a more thorough
 description.  Tools that turn commits into email, for example, use
-the first line on the Subject line and the rest of the commit in the
+the first line on the 'Subject' line and the rest of the commit in the
 body.
 
 [[ignoring-files]]
 Ignoring files
 --------------
 
-A project will often generate files that you do 'not' want to track with git.
+A project will often generate files that you do *not* want to track with git.
 This typically includes files generated by a build process or temporary
-backup files made by your editor. Of course, 'not' tracking files with git
-is just a matter of 'not' calling `git add` on them. But it quickly becomes
+backup files made by your editor. Of course, *not* tracking files with git
+is just a matter of *not* calling `git add` on them. But it quickly becomes
 annoying to have these untracked files lying around; e.g. they make
 `git add .` practically useless, and they keep showing up in the output of
 `git status`.
 
-You can tell git to ignore certain files by creating a file called .gitignore
+You can tell git to ignore certain files by creating a file called `.gitignore`
 in the top level of your working directory, with contents such as:
 
 -------------------------------------------------
@@ -1157,16 +1157,16 @@ foo.txt
 -------------------------------------------------
 
 See linkgit:gitignore[5] for a detailed explanation of the syntax.  You can
-also place .gitignore files in other directories in your working tree, and they
+also place `.gitignore` files in other directories in your working tree, and they
 will apply to those directories and their subdirectories.  The `.gitignore`
-files can be added to your repository like any other files (just run `git add
-.gitignore` and `git commit`, as usual), which is convenient when the exclude
+files can be added to your repository like any other files (just run '"git add
+.gitignore"' and '"git commit"', as usual), which is convenient when the exclude
 patterns (such as patterns matching build output files) would also make sense
 for other users who clone your repository.
 
 If you wish the exclude patterns to affect only certain repositories
 (instead of every repository for a given project), you may instead put
-them in a file in your repository named .git/info/exclude, or in any file
+them in a file in your repository named '.git/info/exclude', or in any file
 specified by the `core.excludesfile` configuration variable.  Some git
 commands can also take exclude patterns directly on the command line.
 See linkgit:gitignore[5] for the details.
@@ -1182,10 +1182,10 @@ linkgit:git-merge[1]:
 $ git merge branchname
 -------------------------------------------------
 
-merges the development in the branch "branchname" into the current
+merges the development in the branch '"branchname"' into the current
 branch.
 
-A merge is made by combining the changes made in "branchname" and the
+A merge is made by combining the changes made in 'branchname' and the
 changes made up to the latest commit in your current branch since
 their histories forked. The work tree is overwritten by the result of
 the merge when this combining is done cleanly, or overwritten by a
@@ -1213,10 +1213,10 @@ Automatic merge failed; fix conflicts and then commit the result.
 
 Conflict markers are left in the problematic files, and after
 you resolve the conflicts manually, you can update the index
-with the contents and run git commit, as you normally would when
+with the contents and run `git commit`, as you normally would when
 creating a new file.
 
-If you examine the resulting commit using gitk, you will see that it
+If you examine the resulting commit using `gitk`, you will see that it
 has two parents, one pointing to the top of the current branch, and
 one to the top of the other branch.
 
@@ -1237,7 +1237,7 @@ $ git commit
 file.txt: needs merge
 -------------------------------------------------
 
-Also, linkgit:git-status[1] will list those files as "unmerged", and the
+Also, linkgit:git-status[1] will list those files as '"unmerged"', and the
 files with conflicts will have conflict markers added, like this:
 
 -------------------------------------------------
@@ -1287,11 +1287,11 @@ index 802992c,2b60207..0000000
 
 Recall that the commit which will be committed after we resolve this
 conflict will have two parents instead of the usual one: one parent
-will be HEAD, the tip of the current branch; the other will be the
-tip of the other branch, which is stored temporarily in MERGE_HEAD.
+will be `HEAD`, the tip of the current branch; the other will be the
+tip of the other branch, which is stored temporarily in `MERGE_HEAD`.
 
 During the merge, the index holds three versions of each file.  Each of
-these three "file stages" represents a different version of the file:
+these three ``file stages'' represents a different version of the file:
 
 -------------------------------------------------
 $ git show :1:file.txt	# the file in a common ancestor of both branches
@@ -1306,11 +1306,11 @@ mixed (in other words, when a hunk's merge results come only from stage 2,
 that part is not conflicting and is not shown.  Same for stage 3).
 
 The diff above shows the differences between the working-tree version of
-file.txt and the stage 2 and stage 3 versions.  So instead of preceding
-each line by a single "+" or "-", it now uses two columns: the first
+'file.txt' and the stage 2 and stage 3 versions.  So instead of preceding
+each line by a single '"+"' or '"-"', it now uses two columns: the first
 column is used for differences between the first parent and the working
 directory copy, and the second for differences between the second parent
-and the working directory copy.  (See the "COMBINED DIFF FORMAT" section
+and the working directory copy.  (See the '"COMBINED DIFF FORMAT"' section
 of linkgit:git-diff-files[1] for a details of the format.)
 
 After resolving the conflict in the obvious way (but before updating the
@@ -1328,9 +1328,9 @@ index 802992c,2b60207..0000000
 ++Goodbye world
 -------------------------------------------------
 
-This shows that our resolved version deleted "Hello world" from the
-first parent, deleted "Goodbye" from the second parent, and added
-"Goodbye world", which was previously absent from both.
+This shows that our resolved version deleted '"Hello world"' from the
+first parent, deleted '"Goodbye"' from the second parent, and added
+'"Goodbye world"', which was previously absent from both.
 
 Some special diff options allow diffing the working directory against
 any of these stages:
@@ -1352,11 +1352,11 @@ $ git log --merge
 $ gitk --merge
 -------------------------------------------------
 
-These will display all commits which exist only on HEAD or on
-MERGE_HEAD, and which touch an unmerged file.
+These will display all commits which exist only on `HEAD` or on
+`MERGE_HEAD`, and which touch an unmerged file.
 
 You may also use linkgit:git-mergetool[1], which lets you merge the
-unmerged files using external tools such as Emacs or kdiff3.
+unmerged files using external tools such as 'Emacs' or 'kdiff3'.
 
 Each time you resolve the conflicts in a file and update the index:
 
@@ -1364,7 +1364,7 @@ Each time you resolve the conflicts in a file and update the index:
 $ git add file.txt
 -------------------------------------------------
 
-the different stages of that file will be "collapsed", after which
+the different stages of that file will be '"collapsed"', after which
 `git diff` will (by default) no longer show diffs for that file.
 
 [[undoing-a-merge]]
@@ -1400,7 +1400,7 @@ were merged.
 
 However, if the current branch is a descendant of the other--so every
 commit present in the one is already contained in the other--then git
-just performs a "fast-forward"; the head of the current branch is moved
+just performs a '``fast-forward'''; the head of the current branch is moved
 forward to point at the head of the merged-in branch, without any new
 commits being created.
 
@@ -1425,7 +1425,7 @@ fundamentally different ways to fix the problem:
 
 	2. You can go back and modify the old commit.  You should
 	never do this if you have already made the history public;
-	git does not normally expect the "history" of a project to
+	git does not normally expect the `history' of a project to
 	change, and cannot correctly perform repeated merges from
 	a branch that has had its history changed.
 
@@ -1441,7 +1441,7 @@ commit; for example, to revert the most recent commit:
 $ git revert HEAD
 -------------------------------------------------
 
-This will create a new commit which undoes the change in HEAD.  You
+This will create a new commit which undoes the change in `HEAD`.  You
 will be given a chance to edit the commit message for the new commit.
 
 You can also revert an earlier change, for example, the next-to-last:
@@ -1498,7 +1498,7 @@ name: the command
 $ git checkout HEAD^ path/to/file
 -------------------------------------------------
 
-replaces path/to/file by the contents it had in the commit HEAD^, and
+replaces '"path/to/file"' by the contents it had in the commit 'HEAD^', and
 also updates the index to match.  It does not change branches.
 
 If you just want to look at an old version of the file, without
@@ -1571,7 +1571,7 @@ Checking the repository for corruption
 
 The linkgit:git-fsck[1] command runs a number of self-consistency checks
 on the repository, and reports on any problems.  This may take some
-time.  The most common warning by far is about "dangling" objects:
+time.  The most common warning by far is about 'dangling' objects:
 
 -------------------------------------------------
 $ git fsck
@@ -1598,11 +1598,11 @@ Recovering lost changes
 Reflogs
 ^^^^^^^
 
-Say you modify a branch with `linkgit:git-reset[1] --hard`, and then
+Say you modify a branch with `git reset --hard`, and then
 realize that the branch was the only reference you had to that point in
 history.
 
-Fortunately, git also keeps a log, called a "reflog", of all the
+Fortunately, git also keeps a log, called a `reflog`, of all the
 previous values of each branch.  So in this case you can still find the
 old history using, for example,
 
@@ -1611,8 +1611,8 @@ $ git log master@{1}
 -------------------------------------------------
 
 This lists the commits reachable from the previous version of the
-"master" branch head.  This syntax can be used with any git command
-that accepts a commit, not just with git log.  Some other examples:
+'master' branch head.  This syntax can be used with any git command
+that accepts a commit, not just with `git log`.  Some other examples:
 
 -------------------------------------------------
 $ git show master@{2}		# See where the branch pointed 2,
@@ -1622,19 +1622,19 @@ $ gitk master@{"1 week ago"}	# ... or last week
 $ git log --walk-reflogs master	# show reflog entries for master
 -------------------------------------------------
 
-A separate reflog is kept for the HEAD, so
+A separate `reflog` is kept for the `HEAD`, so
 
 -------------------------------------------------
 $ git show HEAD@{"1 week ago"}
 -------------------------------------------------
 
-will show what HEAD pointed to one week ago, not what the current branch
+will show what `HEAD` pointed to one week ago, not what the current branch
 pointed to one week ago.  This allows you to see the history of what
 you've checked out.
 
 The reflogs are kept by default for 30 days, after which they may be
 pruned.  See linkgit:git-reflog[1] and linkgit:git-gc[1] to learn
-how to control this pruning, and see the "SPECIFYING REVISIONS"
+how to control this pruning, and see the '"SPECIFYING REVISIONS"'
 section of linkgit:git-rev-parse[1] for details.
 
 Note that the reflog history is very different from normal git history.
@@ -1673,7 +1673,7 @@ history that is described by the dangling commit(s), but not the
 history that is described by all your existing branches and tags.  Thus
 you get exactly the history reachable from that commit that is lost.
 (And notice that it might not be just one commit: we only report the
-"tip of the line" as being dangling, but there might be a whole deep
+``tip of the line'' as being dangling, but there might be a whole deep
 and complex commit history that was dropped.)
 
 If you decide you want the history back, you can always create a new
@@ -1716,8 +1716,8 @@ one step:
 $ git pull origin master
 -------------------------------------------------
 
-In fact, if you have "master" checked out, then by default "git pull"
-merges from the HEAD branch of the origin repository.  So often you can
+In fact, if you have 'master' checked out, then by default `git pull`
+merges from the `HEAD` branch of the origin repository.  So often you can
 accomplish the above with just a simple
 
 -------------------------------------------------
@@ -1726,11 +1726,11 @@ $ git pull
 
 More generally, a branch that is created from a remote branch will pull
 by default from that branch.  See the descriptions of the
-branch.<name>.remote and branch.<name>.merge options in
+'branch.<name>.remote' and 'branch.<name>.merge' options in
 linkgit:git-config[1], and the discussion of the `--track` option in
 linkgit:git-checkout[1], to learn how to control these defaults.
 
-In addition to saving you keystrokes, "git pull" also helps you by
+In addition to saving you keystrokes, `git pull` also helps you by
 producing a default commit message documenting the branch and
 repository that you pulled from.
 
@@ -1738,7 +1738,7 @@ repository that you pulled from.
 <<fast-forwards,fast-forward>>; instead, your branch will just be
 updated to point to the latest commit from the upstream branch.)
 
-The `git pull` command can also be given "." as the "remote" repository,
+The `git pull` command can also be given '"."' as the 'remote' repository,
 in which case it just merges in a branch from the current repository; so
 the commands
 
@@ -1763,7 +1763,7 @@ $ git format-patch origin
 -------------------------------------------------
 
 will produce a numbered series of files in the current directory, one
-for each patch in the current branch but not in origin/HEAD.
+for each patch in the current branch but not in 'origin/HEAD'.
 
 You can then import these into your mail client and send them by
 hand.  However, if you have a lot to send at once, you may prefer to
@@ -1776,9 +1776,9 @@ Importing patches to a project
 ------------------------------
 
 Git also provides a tool called linkgit:git-am[1] (am stands for
-"apply mailbox"), for importing such an emailed series of patches.
+``apply mailbox''), for importing such an emailed series of patches.
 Just save all of the patch-containing messages, in order, into a
-single mailbox file, say "patches.mbox", then run
+single mailbox file, say '"patches.mbox"', then run
 
 -------------------------------------------------
 $ git am -3 patches.mbox
@@ -1786,7 +1786,7 @@ $ git am -3 patches.mbox
 
 Git will apply each patch in order; if any conflicts are found, it
 will stop, and you can fix the conflicts as described in
-"<<resolving-a-merge,Resolving a merge>>".  (The "-3" option tells
+"<<resolving-a-merge,Resolving a merge>>".  (The `-3` option tells
 git to perform a merge; if you would prefer it just to abort and
 leave your tree and index untouched, you may omit that option.)
 
@@ -1812,7 +1812,7 @@ Another way to submit changes to a project is to tell the maintainer
 of that project to pull the changes from your repository using
 linkgit:git-pull[1].  In the section "<<getting-updates-With-git-pull,
 Getting updates with `git pull`>>" we described this as a way to get
-updates from the "main" repository, but it works just as well in the
+updates from the '"main"' repository, but it works just as well in the
 other direction.
 
 If you and the maintainer both have accounts on the same machine, then
@@ -1840,7 +1840,7 @@ from.  This is usually more convenient, and allows you to cleanly
 separate private work in progress from publicly visible work.
 
 You will continue to do your day-to-day work in your personal
-repository, but periodically "push" changes from your personal
+repository, but periodically '"push"' changes from your personal
 repository into your public repository, allowing other developers to
 pull from that repository.  So the flow of changes, in a situation
 where there is one other developer with a public repository, looks
@@ -1862,7 +1862,7 @@ We explain how to do this in the following sections.
 Setting up a public repository
 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 
-Assume your personal repository is in the directory ~/proj.  We
+Assume your personal repository is in the directory '~/proj'.  We
 first create a new clone of the repository and tell `git daemon` that it
 is meant to be public:
 
@@ -1871,12 +1871,12 @@ $ git clone --bare ~/proj proj.git
 $ touch proj.git/git-daemon-export-ok
 -------------------------------------------------
 
-The resulting directory proj.git contains a "bare" git repository--it is
-just the contents of the ".git" directory, without any files checked out
+The resulting directory 'proj.git' contains a '"bare"' git repository--it is
+just the contents of the `.git` directory, without any files checked out
 around it.
 
-Next, copy proj.git to the server where you plan to host the
-public repository.  You can use scp, rsync, or whatever is most
+Next, copy 'proj.git' to the server where you plan to host the
+public repository.  You can use 'scp', 'rsync', or whatever is most
 convenient.
 
 [[exporting-via-git]]
@@ -1886,7 +1886,7 @@ Exporting a git repository via the git protocol
 This is the preferred method.
 
 If someone else administers the server, they should tell you what
-directory to put the repository in, and what git:// URL it will appear
+directory to put the repository in, and what 'git://' URL it will appear
 at.  You can then skip to the section
 "<<pushing-changes-to-a-public-repository,Pushing changes to a public
 repository>>", below.
@@ -1894,7 +1894,7 @@ repository>>", below.
 Otherwise, all you need to do is start linkgit:git-daemon[1]; it will
 listen on port 9418.  By default, it will allow access to any directory
 that looks like a git directory and contains the magic file
-git-daemon-export-ok.  Passing some directory paths as `git daemon`
+'git-daemon-export-ok'.  Passing some directory paths as `git daemon`
 arguments will further restrict the exports to those paths.
 
 You can also run `git daemon` as an inetd service; see the
@@ -1922,7 +1922,7 @@ $ mv hooks/post-update.sample hooks/post-update
 (For an explanation of the last two lines, see
 linkgit:git-update-server-info[1] and linkgit:githooks[5].)
 
-Advertise the URL of proj.git.  Anybody else should then be able to
+Advertise the URL of 'proj.git'.  Anybody else should then be able to
 clone or pull from that URL, for example with a command line like:
 
 -------------------------------------------------
@@ -1945,8 +1945,8 @@ access, which you will need to update the public repository with the
 latest changes created in your private repository.
 
 The simplest way to do this is using linkgit:git-push[1] and ssh; to
-update the remote branch named "master" with the latest state of your
-branch named "master", run
+update the remote branch named 'master' with the latest state of your
+branch named 'master', run
 
 -------------------------------------------------
 $ git push ssh://yourserver.com/~you/proj.git master:master
@@ -1962,7 +1962,7 @@ As with `git fetch`, `git push` will complain if this does not result in a
 <<fast-forwards,fast-forward>>; see the following section for details on
 handling this case.
 
-Note that the target of a "push" is normally a
+Note that the target of a 'push' is normally a
 <<def_bare_repository,bare>> repository.  You can also push to a
 repository that has a checked-out working tree, but the working tree
 will not be updated by the push.  This may lead to unexpected results if
@@ -1984,8 +1984,8 @@ you should be able to perform the above push with just
 $ git push public-repo master
 -------------------------------------------------
 
-See the explanations of the remote.<name>.url, branch.<name>.remote,
-and remote.<name>.push options in linkgit:git-config[1] for
+See the explanations of the 'remote.<name>.url', 'branch.<name>.remote',
+and 'remote.<name>.push' options in linkgit:git-config[1] for
 details.
 
 [[forcing-push]]
@@ -2061,9 +2061,9 @@ advantages over the central shared repository:
 	  trivial for another developer to take over maintenance of a
 	  project, either by mutual agreement, or because a maintainer
 	  becomes unresponsive or difficult to work with.
-	- The lack of a central group of "committers" means there is
-	  less need for formal decisions about who is "in" and who is
-	  "out".
+	- The lack of a central group of ``committers'' means there is
+	  less need for formal decisions about who is ``in'' and who is
+	  ``out''.
 
 [[setting-up-gitweb]]
 Allowing web browsing of a repository
@@ -2071,7 +2071,7 @@ Allowing web browsing of a repository
 
 The gitweb cgi script provides users an easy way to browse your
 project's files and history without having to install git; see the file
-gitweb/INSTALL in the git source tree for instructions on setting it up.
+'gitweb/INSTALL' in the git source tree for instructions on setting it up.
 
 [[sharing-development-examples]]
 Examples
@@ -2086,16 +2086,16 @@ IA64 architecture for the Linux kernel.
 
 He uses two public branches:
 
- - A "test" tree into which patches are initially placed so that they
+ - A '"test"' tree into which patches are initially placed so that they
    can get some exposure when integrated with other ongoing development.
-   This tree is available to Andrew for pulling into -mm whenever he
+   This tree is available to Andrew for pulling into '-mm' whenever he
    wants.
 
- - A "release" tree into which tested patches are moved for final sanity
+ - A '"release"' tree into which tested patches are moved for final sanity
    checking, and as a vehicle to send them upstream to Linus (by sending
-   him a "please pull" request.)
+   him a ``please pull'' request.)
 
-He also uses a set of temporary branches ("topic branches"), each
+He also uses a set of temporary branches (``topic branches''), each
 containing a logical grouping of patches.
 
 To set this up, first create your work tree by cloning Linus's public
@@ -2108,13 +2108,13 @@ $ cd work
 
 Linus's tree will be stored in the remote branch named origin/master,
 and can be updated using linkgit:git-fetch[1]; you can track other
-public trees using linkgit:git-remote[1] to set up a "remote" and
+public trees using linkgit:git-remote[1] to set up a 'remote' and
 linkgit:git-fetch[1] to keep them up-to-date; see
 <<repositories-and-branches>>.
 
 Now create the branches in which you are going to work; these start out
-at the current tip of origin/master branch, and should be set up (using
-the --track option to linkgit:git-branch[1]) to merge changes in from
+at the current tip of 'origin/master' branch, and should be set up (using
+the `--track` option to linkgit:git-branch[1]) to merge changes in from
 Linus by default.
 
 -------------------------------------------------
@@ -2129,11 +2129,11 @@ $ git checkout test && git pull
 $ git checkout release && git pull
 -------------------------------------------------
 
-Important note!  If you have any local changes in these branches, then
+*Important note!*  If you have any local changes in these branches, then
 this merge will create a commit object in the history (with no local
-changes git will simply do a "fast-forward" merge).  Many people dislike
-the "noise" that this creates in the Linux history, so you should avoid
-doing this capriciously in the "release" branch, as these noisy commits
+changes git will simply do a 'fast-forward' merge).  Many people dislike
+the ``noise'' that this creates in the Linux history, so you should avoid
+doing this capriciously in the 'release' branch, as these noisy commits
 will become part of the permanent history when you ask Linus to pull
 from the release branch.
 
@@ -2187,7 +2187,7 @@ $ ... patch ... test  ... commit [ ... patch ... test ... commit ]*
 -------------------------------------------------
 
 When you are happy with the state of this change, you can pull it into the
-"test" branch in preparation to make it public:
+'test' branch in preparation to make it public:
 
 -------------------------------------------------
 $ git checkout test && git pull . speed-up-spinlocks
@@ -2197,9 +2197,9 @@ It is unlikely that you would have any conflicts here ... but you might if you
 spent a while on this step and had also pulled new versions from upstream.
 
 Some time later when enough time has passed and testing done, you can pull the
-same branch into the "release" tree ready to go upstream.  This is where you
+same branch into the 'release' tree ready to go upstream.  This is where you
 see the value of keeping each patch (or patch series) in its own branch.  It
-means that the patches can be moved into the "release" tree in any order.
+means that the patches can be moved into the 'release' tree in any order.
 
 -------------------------------------------------
 $ git checkout release && git pull . speed-up-spinlocks
@@ -2232,7 +2232,7 @@ If it has been merged, then there will be no output.)
 
 Once a patch completes the great cycle (moving from test to release,
 then pulled by Linus, and finally coming back into your local
-"origin/master" branch), the branch for this change is no longer needed.
+'origin/master' branch), the branch for this change is no longer needed.
 You detect this when the output from:
 
 -------------------------------------------------
@@ -2247,11 +2247,11 @@ $ git branch -d branchname
 
 Some changes are so trivial that it is not necessary to create a separate
 branch and then merge into each of the test and release branches.  For
-these changes, just apply directly to the "release" branch, and then
-merge that into the "test" branch.
+these changes, just apply directly to the 'release' branch, and then
+merge that into the 'test' branch.
 
-To create diffstat and shortlog summaries of changes to include in a "please
-pull" request to Linus you can use:
+To create diffstat and shortlog summaries of changes to include in a ``please
+pull'' request to Linus you can use:
 
 -------------------------------------------------
 $ git diff --stat origin..release
@@ -2420,11 +2420,11 @@ use them, and then explain some of the problems that can arise because
 you are rewriting history.
 
 [[using-git-rebase]]
-Keeping a patch series up to date using git rebase
+Keeping a patch series up to date using `git rebase`
 --------------------------------------------------
 
-Suppose that you create a branch "mywork" on a remote-tracking branch
-"origin", and create some commits on top of it:
+Suppose that you create a branch '"mywork"' on a remote-tracking branch
+'"origin"', and create some commits on top of it:
 
 -------------------------------------------------
 $ git checkout -b mywork origin
@@ -2435,8 +2435,8 @@ $ git commit
 ...
 -------------------------------------------------
 
-You have performed no merges into mywork, so it is just a simple linear
-sequence of patches on top of "origin":
+You have performed no merges into 'mywork', so it is just a simple linear
+sequence of patches on top of 'origin':
 
 ................................................
  o--o--o <-- origin
@@ -2445,7 +2445,7 @@ sequence of patches on top of "origin":
 ................................................
 
 Some more interesting work has been done in the upstream project, and
-"origin" has advanced:
+'origin' has advanced:
 
 ................................................
  o--o--O--o--o--o <-- origin
@@ -2453,7 +2453,7 @@ Some more interesting work has been done in the upstream project, and
          a--b--c <-- mywork
 ................................................
 
-At this point, you could use "pull" to merge your changes back in;
+At this point, you could use `git pull` to merge your changes back in;
 the result would create a new merge commit, like this:
 
 ................................................
@@ -2462,7 +2462,7 @@ the result would create a new merge commit, like this:
          a--b--c--m <-- mywork
 ................................................
 
-However, if you prefer to keep the history in mywork a simple series of
+However, if you prefer to keep the history in 'mywork' a simple series of
 commits without any merges, you may instead choose to use
 linkgit:git-rebase[1]:
 
@@ -2471,10 +2471,10 @@ $ git checkout mywork
 $ git rebase origin
 -------------------------------------------------
 
-This will remove each of your commits from mywork, temporarily saving
-them as patches (in a directory named ".git/rebase-apply"), update mywork to
-point at the latest version of origin, then apply each of the saved
-patches to the new mywork.  The result will look like:
+This will remove each of your commits from 'mywork', temporarily saving
+them as patches (in a directory named '.git/rebase-apply'), update 'mywork' to
+point at the latest version of 'origin', then apply each of the saved
+patches to the new 'mywork'.  The result will look like:
 
 
 ................................................
@@ -2495,7 +2495,7 @@ $ git rebase --continue
 and git will continue applying the rest of the patches.
 
 At any point you may use the `--abort` option to abort this process and
-return mywork to the state it had before you started the rebase:
+return 'mywork' to the state it had before you started the rebase:
 
 -------------------------------------------------
 $ git rebase --abort
-- 
1.6.6.1

[PATCH v2 2/2] user-manual: general quoting improvements (p2)

[Felipe Contreras]

note: should be squashed with p1
---
 Documentation/user-manual.txt |  458 ++++++++++++++++++++--------------------
 1 files changed, 229 insertions(+), 229 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/user-manual.txt b/Documentation/user-manual.txt
index 8ab8968..d3e509d 100644
--- a/Documentation/user-manual.txt
+++ b/Documentation/user-manual.txt
@@ -2524,7 +2524,7 @@ with
 $ git tag bad mywork~5
 -------------------------------------------------
 
-(Either gitk or `git log` may be useful for finding the commit.)
+(Either `gitk` or `git log` may be useful for finding the commit.)
 
 Then check out that commit, edit it, and rebase the rest of the series
 on top of it (note that we could check out the commit on a temporary
@@ -2537,8 +2537,8 @@ $ git commit --amend
 $ git rebase --onto HEAD bad mywork
 -------------------------------------------------
 
-When you're done, you'll be left with mywork checked out, with the top
-patches on mywork reapplied on top of your modified commit.  You can
+When you're done, you'll be left with 'mywork' checked out, with the top
+patches on 'mywork' reapplied on top of your modified commit.  You can
 then clean up with
 
 -------------------------------------------------
@@ -2546,7 +2546,7 @@ $ git tag -d bad
 -------------------------------------------------
 
 Note that the immutable nature of git history means that you haven't really
-"modified" existing commits; instead, you have replaced the old commits with
+`modified' existing commits; instead, you have replaced the old commits with
 new commits having new object names.
 
 [[reordering-patch-series]]
@@ -2555,20 +2555,20 @@ Reordering or selecting from a patch series
 
 Given one existing commit, the linkgit:git-cherry-pick[1] command
 allows you to apply the change introduced by that commit and create a
-new commit that records it.  So, for example, if "mywork" points to a
-series of patches on top of "origin", you might do something like:
+new commit that records it.  So, for example, if 'mywork' points to a
+series of patches on top of 'origin', you might do something like:
 
 -------------------------------------------------
 $ git checkout -b mywork-new origin
 $ gitk origin..mywork &
 -------------------------------------------------
 
-and browse through the list of patches in the mywork branch using gitk,
-applying them (possibly in a different order) to mywork-new using
-cherry-pick, and possibly modifying them as you go using `git commit --amend`.
+and browse through the list of patches in the 'mywork' branch using `gitk`,
+applying them (possibly in a different order) to 'mywork-new' using
+`git cherry-pick`, and possibly modifying them as you go using `git commit --amend`.
 The linkgit:git-gui[1] command may also help as it allows you to
 individually select diff hunks for inclusion in the index (by
-right-clicking on the diff hunk and choosing "Stage Hunk for Commit").
+right-clicking on the diff hunk and choosing '"Stage Hunk for Commit"').
 
 Another technique is to use `git format-patch` to create a series of
 patches, then reset the state to before the patches:
@@ -2585,7 +2585,7 @@ them again with linkgit:git-am[1].
 Other tools
 -----------
 
-There are numerous other tools, such as StGit, which exist for the
+There are numerous other tools, such as 'StGit', which exist for the
 purpose of maintaining a patch series.  These are outside of the scope of
 this manual.
 
@@ -2656,26 +2656,26 @@ Imagine this history:
 ................................................
 
 Suppose that on the upper line of development, the meaning of one
-of the functions that exists at Z is changed at commit X.  The
-commits from Z leading to A change both the function's
-implementation and all calling sites that exist at Z, as well
+of the functions that exists at 'Z' is changed at commit 'X'.  The
+commits from 'Z' leading to A change both the function's
+implementation and all calling sites that exist at 'Z', as well
 as new calling sites they add, to be consistent.  There is no
-bug at A.
+bug at 'A'.
 
 Suppose that in the meantime on the lower line of development somebody
-adds a new calling site for that function at commit Y.  The
-commits from Z leading to B all assume the old semantics of that
+adds a new calling site for that function at commit 'Y'.  The
+commits from 'Z' leading to 'B' all assume the old semantics of that
 function and the callers and the callee are consistent with each
-other.  There is no bug at B, either.
+other.  There is no bug at 'B', either.
 
-Suppose further that the two development lines merge cleanly at C,
+Suppose further that the two development lines merge cleanly at 'C',
 so no conflict resolution is required.
 
-Nevertheless, the code at C is broken, because the callers added
+Nevertheless, the code at 'C' is broken, because the callers added
 on the lower line of development have not been converted to the new
 semantics introduced on the upper line of development.  So if all
-you know is that D is bad, that Z is good, and that
-linkgit:git-bisect[1] identifies C as the culprit, how will you
+you know is that 'D' is bad, that 'Z' is good, and that
+linkgit:git-bisect[1] identifies 'C' as the culprit, how will you
 figure out that the problem is due to this change in semantics?
 
 When the result of a `git bisect` is a non-merge commit, you should
@@ -2688,16 +2688,16 @@ make matters worse, the change in semantics in the problematic
 function may be just one small part of the changes in the upper
 line of development.
 
-On the other hand, if instead of merging at C you had rebased the
-history between Z to B on top of A, you would have gotten this
+On the other hand, if instead of merging at 'C' you had rebased the
+history between 'Z' to 'B' on top of 'A', you would have gotten this
 linear history:
 
 ................................................................
     ---Z---o---X--...---o---A---o---o---Y*--...---o---B*--D*
 ................................................................
 
-Bisecting between Z and D* would hit a single culprit commit Y*,
-and understanding why Y* was broken would probably be easier.
+Bisecting between 'Z' and 'D*' would hit a single culprit commit 'Y*',
+and understanding why 'Y*' was broken would probably be easier.
 
 Partly for this reason, many experienced git users, even when
 working on an otherwise merge-heavy project, keep the history
@@ -2720,10 +2720,10 @@ arbitrary name:
 $ git fetch origin todo:my-todo-work
 -------------------------------------------------
 
-The first argument, "origin", just tells git to fetch from the
+The first argument, 'origin', just tells git to fetch from the
 repository you originally cloned from.  The second argument tells git
-to fetch the branch named "todo" from the remote repository, and to
-store it locally under the name refs/heads/my-todo-work.
+to fetch the branch named 'todo' from the remote repository, and to
+store it locally under the name 'refs/heads/my-todo-work'.
 
 You can also fetch branches from other repositories; so
 
@@ -2731,9 +2731,9 @@ You can also fetch branches from other repositories; so
 $ git fetch git://example.com/proj.git master:example-master
 -------------------------------------------------
 
-will create a new branch named "example-master" and store in it the
-branch named "master" from the repository at the given URL.  If you
-already have a branch named example-master, it will attempt to
+will create a new branch named '"example-master"' and store in it the
+branch named '"master"' from the repository at the given URL.  If you
+already have a branch named 'example-master', it will attempt to
 <<fast-forwards,fast-forward>> to the commit given by example.com's
 master branch.  In more detail:
 
@@ -2747,7 +2747,7 @@ branch is a descendant of the most recent commit on your copy of the
 branch before updating your copy of the branch to point at the new
 commit.  Git calls this process a <<fast-forwards,fast-forward>>.
 
-A fast-forward looks something like this:
+A 'fast-forward' looks something like this:
 
 ................................................
  o--o--o--o <-- old head of the branch
@@ -2771,36 +2771,36 @@ In this case, "git fetch" will fail, and print out a warning.
 
 In that case, you can still force git to update to the new head, as
 described in the following section.  However, note that in the
-situation above this may mean losing the commits labeled "a" and "b",
+situation above this may mean losing the commits labeled '"a"' and '"b"',
 unless you've already created a reference of your own pointing to
 them.
 
 [[forcing-fetch]]
-Forcing git fetch to do non-fast-forward updates
+Forcing `git fetch` to do non-fast-forward updates
 ------------------------------------------------
 
-If git fetch fails because the new head of a branch is not a
+If `git fetch` fails because the new head of a branch is not a
 descendant of the old head, you may force the update with:
 
 -------------------------------------------------
 $ git fetch git://example.com/proj.git +master:refs/remotes/example/master
 -------------------------------------------------
 
-Note the addition of the "+" sign.  Alternatively, you can use the "-f"
+Note the addition of the '"+"' sign.  Alternatively, you can use the `-f`
 flag to force updates of all the fetched branches, as in:
 
 -------------------------------------------------
 $ git fetch -f origin
 -------------------------------------------------
 
-Be aware that commits that the old version of example/master pointed at
+Be aware that commits that the old version of 'example/master' pointed at
 may be lost, as we saw in the previous section.
 
 [[remote-branch-configuration]]
 Configuring remote branches
 ---------------------------
 
-We saw above that "origin" is just a shortcut to refer to the
+We saw above that '"origin"' is just a shortcut to refer to the
 repository that you originally cloned from.  This information is
 stored in git configuration variables, which you can see using
 linkgit:git-config[1]:
@@ -2845,7 +2845,7 @@ $ git fetch example master:refs/remotes/example/master
 $ git fetch example
 -------------------------------------------------
 
-You can also add a "+" to force the update each time:
+You can also add a '"+"' to force the update each time:
 
 -------------------------------------------------
 $ git config remote.example.fetch +master:ref/remotes/example/master
@@ -2855,7 +2855,7 @@ Don't do this unless you're sure you won't mind "git fetch" possibly
 throwing away commits on 'example/master'.
 
 Also note that all of the above configuration can be performed by
-directly editing the file .git/config instead of using
+directly editing the file `.git/config` instead of using
 linkgit:git-config[1].
 
 See linkgit:git-config[1] for more details on the configuration
@@ -2879,10 +2879,10 @@ The Object Database
 
 
 We already saw in <<understanding-commits>> that all commits are stored
-under a 40-digit "object name".  In fact, all the information needed to
+under a 40-digit 'object name'.  In fact, all the information needed to
 represent the history of a project is stored in objects with such names.
-In each case the name is calculated by taking the SHA-1 hash of the
-contents of the object.  The SHA-1 hash is a cryptographic hash function.
+In each case the name is calculated by taking the `SHA-1` hash of the
+contents of the object.  The `SHA-1` hash is a cryptographic hash function.
 What that means to us is that it is impossible to find two different
 objects with the same name.  This has a number of advantages; among
 others:
@@ -2893,25 +2893,25 @@ others:
   same content stored in two repositories will always be stored under
   the same name.
 - Git can detect errors when it reads an object, by checking that the
-  object's name is still the SHA-1 hash of its contents.
+  object's name is still the `SHA-1` hash of its contents.
 
 (See <<object-details>> for the details of the object formatting and
-SHA-1 calculation.)
+`SHA-1` calculation.)
 
-There are four different types of objects: "blob", "tree", "commit", and
-"tag".
+There are four different types of objects: 'blob', 'tree', 'commit', and
+'tag'.
 
-- A <<def_blob_object,"blob" object>> is used to store file data.
-- A <<def_tree_object,"tree" object>> ties one or more
-  "blob" objects into a directory structure. In addition, a tree object
+- A <<def_blob_object,'blob' object>> is used to store file data.
+- A <<def_tree_object,'tree' object>> ties one or more
+  'blob' objects into a directory structure. In addition, a tree object
   can refer to other tree objects, thus creating a directory hierarchy.
-- A <<def_commit_object,"commit" object>> ties such directory hierarchies
+- A <<def_commit_object,'commit' object>> ties such directory hierarchies
   together into a <<def_DAG,directed acyclic graph>> of revisions--each
   commit contains the object name of exactly one tree designating the
   directory hierarchy at the time of the commit. In addition, a commit
-  refers to "parent" commit objects that describe the history of how we
+  refers to 'parent' commit objects that describe the history of how we
   arrived at that directory hierarchy.
-- A <<def_tag_object,"tag" object>> symbolically identifies and can be
+- A <<def_tag_object,`tag` object>> symbolically identifies and can be
   used to sign other objects. It contains the object name and type of
   another object, a symbolic name (of course!) and, optionally, a
   signature.
@@ -2922,8 +2922,8 @@ The object types in some more detail:
 Commit Object
 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 
-The "commit" object links a physical state of a tree with a description
-of how we got there and why.  Use the --pretty=raw option to
+The 'commit' object links a physical state of a tree with a description
+of how we got there and why.  Use the `--pretty=raw` option to
 linkgit:git-show[1] or linkgit:git-log[1] to examine your favorite
 commit:
 
@@ -2942,19 +2942,19 @@ committer Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> 1187591163 -0700
 
 As you can see, a commit is defined by:
 
-- a tree: The SHA-1 name of a tree object (as defined below), representing
+- a 'tree': The `SHA-1` name of a tree object (as defined below), representing
   the contents of a directory at a certain point in time.
-- parent(s): The SHA-1 name of some number of commits which represent the
+- 'parent(s)': The `SHA-1` name of some number of commits which represent the
   immediately previous step(s) in the history of the project.  The
   example above has one parent; merge commits may have more than
-  one.  A commit with no parents is called a "root" commit, and
+  one.  A commit with no parents is called a 'root' commit, and
   represents the initial revision of a project.  Each project must have
   at least one root.  A project can also have multiple roots, though
   that isn't common (or necessarily a good idea).
-- an author: The name of the person responsible for this change, together
+- an 'author': The name of the person responsible for this change, together
   with its date.
-- a committer: The name of the person who actually created the commit,
-  with the date it was done.  This may be different from the author, for
+- a 'committer': The name of the person who actually created the commit,
+  with the date it was done.  This may be different from the 'author', for
   example, if the author was someone who wrote a patch and emailed it
   to the person who used it to create the commit.
 - a comment describing this commit.
@@ -2965,11 +2965,11 @@ of the tree referred to by this commit with the trees associated with
 its parents.  In particular, git does not attempt to record file renames
 explicitly, though it can identify cases where the existence of the same
 file data at changing paths suggests a rename.  (See, for example, the
--M option to linkgit:git-diff[1]).
+`-M` option to linkgit:git-diff[1]).
 
 A commit is usually created by linkgit:git-commit[1], which creates a
-commit whose parent is normally the current HEAD, and whose tree is
-taken from the content currently stored in the index.
+commit whose parent is normally the current `HEAD`, and whose tree is
+taken from the content currently stored in the `index`.
 
 [[tree-object]]
 Tree Object
@@ -2993,13 +2993,13 @@ $ git ls-tree fb3a8bdd0ce
 ------------------------------------------------
 
 As you can see, a tree object contains a list of entries, each with a
-mode, object type, SHA-1 name, and name, sorted by name.  It represents
+mode, object type, `SHA-1` name, and name, sorted by name.  It represents
 the contents of a single directory tree.
 
 The object type may be a blob, representing the contents of a file, or
 another tree, representing the contents of a subdirectory.  Since trees
-and blobs, like all other objects, are named by the SHA-1 hash of their
-contents, two trees have the same SHA-1 name if and only if their
+and blobs, like all other objects, are named by the `SHA-1` hash of their
+contents, two trees have the same `SHA-1` name if and only if their
 contents (including, recursively, the contents of all subdirectories)
 are identical.  This allows git to quickly determine the differences
 between two related tree objects, since it can ignore any entries with
@@ -3016,7 +3016,7 @@ Blob Object
 ~~~~~~~~~~~
 
 You can use linkgit:git-show[1] to examine the contents of a blob; take,
-for example, the blob in the entry for "COPYING" from the tree above:
+for example, the blob in the entry for 'COPYING' from the tree above:
 
 ------------------------------------------------
 $ git show 6ff87c4664
@@ -3027,7 +3027,7 @@ $ git show 6ff87c4664
 ...
 ------------------------------------------------
 
-A "blob" object is nothing but a binary blob of data.  It doesn't refer
+A 'blob' object is nothing but a binary blob of data.  It doesn't refer
 to anything else or have attributes of any kind.
 
 Since the blob is entirely defined by its data, if two files in a
@@ -3037,7 +3037,7 @@ is totally independent of its location in the directory tree, and
 renaming a file does not change the object that file is associated with.
 
 Note that any tree or blob object can be examined using
-linkgit:git-show[1] with the <revision>:<path> syntax.  This can
+linkgit:git-show[1] with the '<revision>:<path>' syntax.  This can
 sometimes be useful for browsing the contents of a tree that is not
 currently checked out.
 
@@ -3045,27 +3045,27 @@ currently checked out.
 Trust
 ~~~~~
 
-If you receive the SHA-1 name of a blob from one source, and its contents
+If you receive the `SHA-1` name of a blob from one source, and its contents
 from another (possibly untrusted) source, you can still trust that those
-contents are correct as long as the SHA-1 name agrees.  This is because
-the SHA-1 is designed so that it is infeasible to find different contents
+contents are correct as long as the `SHA-1` name agrees.  This is because
+the `SHA-1` is designed so that it is infeasible to find different contents
 that produce the same hash.
 
-Similarly, you need only trust the SHA-1 name of a top-level tree object
+Similarly, you need only trust the `SHA-1` name of a top-level tree object
 to trust the contents of the entire directory that it refers to, and if
-you receive the SHA-1 name of a commit from a trusted source, then you
+you receive the `SHA-1` name of a commit from a trusted source, then you
 can easily verify the entire history of commits reachable through
 parents of that commit, and all of those contents of the trees referred
 to by those commits.
 
 So to introduce some real trust in the system, the only thing you need
-to do is to digitally sign just 'one' special note, which includes the
+to do is to digitally sign just *one* special note, which includes the
 name of a top-level commit.  Your digital signature shows others
 that you trust that commit, and the immutability of the history of
 commits tells others that they can trust the whole history.
 
 In other words, you can easily validate a whole archive by just
-sending out a single email that tells the people the name (SHA-1 hash)
+sending out a single email that tells the people the name (`SHA-1` hash)
 of the top commit, and digitally sign that email using something
 like GPG/PGP.
 
@@ -3075,9 +3075,9 @@ To assist in this, git also provides the tag object...
 Tag Object
 ~~~~~~~~~~
 
-A tag object contains an object, object type, tag name, the name of the
-person ("tagger") who created the tag, and a message, which may contain
-a signature, as can be seen using linkgit:git-cat-file[1]:
+A 'tag' object contains an 'object', 'object type', 'tag name', the name of the
+person ('tagger') who created the tag, and a message, which may contain
+a 'signature', as can be seen using linkgit:git-cat-file[1]:
 
 ------------------------------------------------
 $ git cat-file tag v1.5.0
@@ -3098,15 +3098,15 @@ nLE/L9aUXdWeTFPron96DLA=
 
 See the linkgit:git-tag[1] command to learn how to create and verify tag
 objects.  (Note that linkgit:git-tag[1] can also be used to create
-"lightweight tags", which are not tag objects at all, but just simple
-references whose names begin with "refs/tags/").
+``lightweight tags'', which are not tag objects at all, but just simple
+references whose names begin with 'refs/tags/').
 
 [[pack-files]]
 How git stores objects efficiently: pack files
 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 
 Newly created objects are initially created in a file named after the
-object's SHA-1 hash (stored in .git/objects).
+object's `SHA-1` hash (stored in '.git/objects').
 
 Unfortunately this system becomes inefficient once a project has a
 lot of objects.  Try this on an old project:
@@ -3118,14 +3118,14 @@ $ git count-objects
 
 The first number is the number of objects which are kept in
 individual files.  The second is the amount of space taken up by
-those "loose" objects.
+those 'loose' objects.
 
 You can save space and make git faster by moving these loose objects in
-to a "pack file", which stores a group of objects in an efficient
+to a 'pack file', which stores a group of objects in an efficient
 compressed format; the details of how pack files are formatted can be
 found in link:technical/pack-format.txt[technical/pack-format.txt].
 
-To put the loose objects into a pack, just run git repack:
+To put the loose objects into a pack, just run `git repack`:
 
 ------------------------------------------------
 $ git repack
@@ -3145,11 +3145,11 @@ You can then run
 $ git prune
 ------------------------------------------------
 
-to remove any of the "loose" objects that are now contained in the
+to remove any of the 'loose' objects that are now contained in the
 pack.  This will also remove any unreferenced objects (which may be
-created when, for example, you use "git reset" to remove a commit).
+created when, for example, you use `git reset` to remove a commit).
 You can verify that the loose objects are gone by looking at the
-.git/objects directory or by running
+'.git/objects' directory or by running
 
 ------------------------------------------------
 $ git count-objects
@@ -3176,20 +3176,20 @@ branch still exists, as does everything it pointed to. The branch
 pointer itself just doesn't, since you replaced it with another one.
 
 There are also other situations that cause dangling objects. For
-example, a "dangling blob" may arise because you did a "git add" of a
+example, a 'dangling blob' may arise because you did a `git add` of a
 file, but then, before you actually committed it and made it part of the
 bigger picture, you changed something else in that file and committed
 that *updated* thing--the old state that you added originally ends up
 not being pointed to by any commit or tree, so it's now a dangling blob
 object.
 
-Similarly, when the "recursive" merge strategy runs, and finds that
+Similarly, when the 'recursive' merge strategy runs, and finds that
 there are criss-cross merges and thus more than one merge base (which is
 fairly unusual, but it does happen), it will generate one temporary
 midway tree (or possibly even more, if you had lots of criss-crossing
 merges and more than two merge bases) as a temporary internal merge
 base, and again, those are real objects, but the end result will not end
-up pointing to them, so they end up "dangling" in your repository.
+up pointing to them, so they end up 'dangling' in your repository.
 
 Generally, dangling objects aren't anything to worry about. They can
 even be very useful: if you screw something up, the dangling objects can
@@ -3219,15 +3219,15 @@ $ git show <dangling-blob/tree-sha-goes-here>
 ------------------------------------------------
 
 to show what the contents of the blob were (or, for a tree, basically
-what the "ls" for that directory was), and that may give you some idea
+what the 'ls' for that directory was), and that may give you some idea
 of what the operation was that left that dangling object.
 
 Usually, dangling blobs and trees aren't very interesting. They're
 almost always the result of either being a half-way mergebase (the blob
 will often even have the conflict markers from a merge in it, if you
 have had conflicting merges that you fixed up by hand), or simply
-because you interrupted a "git fetch" with ^C or something like that,
-leaving _some_ of the new objects in the object database, but just
+because you interrupted a `git fetch` with '^C' or something like that,
+leaving *some* of the new objects in the object database, but just
 dangling and useless.
 
 Anyway, once you are sure that you're not interested in any dangling
@@ -3237,17 +3237,17 @@ state, you can just prune all unreachable objects:
 $ git prune
 ------------------------------------------------
 
-and they'll be gone. But you should only run "git prune" on a quiescent
-repository--it's kind of like doing a filesystem fsck recovery: you
+and they'll be gone. But you should only run `git prune` on a quiescent
+repository--it's kind of like doing a filesystem 'fsck' recovery: you
 don't want to do that while the filesystem is mounted.
 
-(The same is true of "git fsck" itself, btw, but since
+(The same is true of `git fsck` itself, btw, but since
 `git fsck` never actually *changes* the repository, it just reports
 on what it found, `git fsck` itself is never 'dangerous' to run.
 Running it while somebody is actually changing the repository can cause
 confusing and scary messages, but it won't actually do anything bad. In
-contrast, running "git prune" while somebody is actively changing the
-repository is a *BAD* idea).
+contrast, running `git prune` while somebody is actively changing the
+repository is a *bad* idea).
 
 [[recovering-from-repository-corruption]]
 Recovering from repository corruption
@@ -3258,7 +3258,7 @@ the absence of bugs in git itself, it is still possible that hardware or
 operating system errors could corrupt data.
 
 The first defense against such problems is backups.  You can back up a
-git directory using clone, or just using cp, tar, or any other backup
+git directory using `git clone`, or just using 'cp', 'tar', or any other backup
 mechanism.
 
 As a last resort, you can search for the corrupted objects and attempt
@@ -3281,13 +3281,13 @@ broken link from    tree 2d9263c6d23595e7cb2a21e5ebbb53655278dff8
 missing blob 4b9458b3786228369c63936db65827de3cc06200
 ------------------------------------------------
 
-(Typically there will be some "dangling object" messages too, but they
+(Typically there will be some 'dangling object' messages too, but they
 aren't interesting.)
 
-Now you know that blob 4b9458b3 is missing, and that the tree 2d9263c6
+Now you know that blob '4b9458b3' is missing, and that the tree '2d9263c6'
 points to it.  If you could find just one copy of that missing blob
 object, possibly in some other repository, you could move it into
-.git/objects/4b/9458b3... and be done.  Suppose you can't.  You can
+'.git/objects/4b/9458b3...' and be done.  Suppose you can't.  You can
 still examine the tree that pointed to it with linkgit:git-ls-tree[1],
 which might output something like:
 
@@ -3302,10 +3302,10 @@ $ git ls-tree 2d9263c6d23595e7cb2a21e5ebbb53655278dff8
 ------------------------------------------------
 
 So now you know that the missing blob was the data for a file named
-"myfile".  And chances are you can also identify the directory--let's
-say it's in "somedirectory".  If you're lucky the missing copy might be
+'myfile'.  And chances are you can also identify the directory--let's
+say it's in 'somedirectory'.  If you're lucky the missing copy might be
 the same as the copy you have checked out in your working tree at
-"somedirectory/myfile"; you can test whether that's right with
+'somedirectory/myfile'; you can test whether that's right with
 linkgit:git-hash-object[1]:
 
 ------------------------------------------------
@@ -3313,8 +3313,8 @@ $ git hash-object -w somedirectory/myfile
 ------------------------------------------------
 
 which will create and store a blob object with the contents of
-somedirectory/myfile, and output the SHA-1 of that object.  if you're
-extremely lucky it might be 4b9458b3786228369c63936db65827de3cc06200, in
+'somedirectory/myfile', and output the `SHA-1` of that object.  if you're
+extremely lucky it might be '4b9458b3786228369c63936db65827de3cc06200', in
 which case you've guessed right, and the corruption is fixed!
 
 Otherwise, you need more information.  How do you tell which version of
@@ -3345,12 +3345,12 @@ Date:
 ------------------------------------------------
 
 This tells you that the immediately preceding version of the file was
-"newsha", and that the immediately following version was "oldsha".
-You also know the commit messages that went with the change from oldsha
-to 4b9458b and with the change from 4b9458b to newsha.
+'newsha', and that the immediately following version was 'oldsha'.
+You also know the commit messages that went with the change from 'oldsha'
+to '4b9458b' and with the change from '4b9458b' to 'newsha'.
 
 If you've been committing small enough changes, you may now have a good
-shot at reconstructing the contents of the in-between state 4b9458b.
+shot at reconstructing the contents of the in-between state '4b9458b'.
 
 If you can do that, you can now recreate the missing object with
 
@@ -3360,13 +3360,13 @@ $ git hash-object -w <recreated-file>
 
 and your repository is good again!
 
-(Btw, you could have ignored the fsck, and started with doing a
+(Btw, you could have ignored the 'fsck', and started with doing a
 
 ------------------------------------------------
 $ git log --raw --all
 ------------------------------------------------
 
-and just looked for the sha of the missing object (4b9458b..) in that
+and just looked for the sha of the missing object ('4b9458b..') in that
 whole thing. It's up to you - git does *have* a lot of information, it is
 just missing one particular blob version.
 
@@ -3374,8 +3374,8 @@ just missing one particular blob version.
 The index
 -----------
 
-The index is a binary file (generally kept in .git/index) containing a
-sorted list of path names, each with permissions and the SHA-1 of a blob
+The index is a binary file (generally kept in `.git/index'` containing a
+sorted list of path names, each with permissions and the `SHA-1` of a blob
 object; linkgit:git-ls-files[1] can show you the contents of the index:
 
 -------------------------------------------------
@@ -3392,7 +3392,7 @@ $ git ls-files --stage
 -------------------------------------------------
 
 Note that in older documentation you may see the index called the
-"current directory cache" or just the "cache".  It has three important
+``current directory cache'' or just the ``cache''.  It has three important
 properties:
 
 1. The index contains all the information necessary to generate a single
@@ -3418,7 +3418,7 @@ associated with sufficient information about the trees involved that
 you can create a three-way merge between them.
 +
 We saw in <<conflict-resolution>> that during a merge the index can
-store multiple versions of a single file (called "stages").  The third
+store multiple versions of a single file (called ``stages'').  The third
 column in the linkgit:git-ls-files[1] output above is the stage
 number, and will take on values other than 0 for files with merge
 conflicts.
@@ -3464,7 +3464,7 @@ Git's submodule support allows a repository to contain, as a subdirectory, a
 checkout of an external project.  Submodules maintain their own identity;
 the submodule support just stores the submodule repository location and
 commit ID, so other developers who clone the containing project
-("superproject") can easily clone all the submodules at the same revision.
+(``superproject'') can easily clone all the submodules at the same revision.
 Partial checkouts of the superproject are possible: you can tell Git to
 clone none, some or all of the submodules.
 
@@ -3491,7 +3491,7 @@ do
 done
 -------------------------------------------------
 
-Now create the superproject and add all the submodules:
+Now create the 'superproject' and add all the submodules:
 
 -------------------------------------------------
 $ mkdir super
@@ -3503,7 +3503,7 @@ do
 done
 -------------------------------------------------
 
-NOTE: Do not use local URLs here if you plan to publish your superproject!
+*NOTE*: Do not use local URLs here if you plan to publish your superproject!
 
 See what files `git submodule` created:
 
@@ -3514,7 +3514,7 @@ $ ls -a
 
 The `git submodule add <repo> <path>` command does a couple of things:
 
-- It clones the submodule from <repo> to the given <path> under the
+- It clones the submodule from '<repo>' to the given '<path>' under the
   current directory and by default checks out the master branch.
 - It adds the submodule's clone path to the linkgit:gitmodules[5] file and
   adds this file to the index, ready to be committed.
@@ -3547,9 +3547,9 @@ $ git submodule status
 -d96249ff5d57de5de093e6baff9e0aafa5276a74 d
 -------------------------------------------------
 
-NOTE: The commit object names shown above would be different for you, but they
-should match the HEAD commit object names of your repositories.  You can check
-it by running `git ls-remote ../a`.
+*NOTE*: The commit object names shown above would be different for you, but they
+should match the `HEAD` commit object names of your repositories.  You can check
+it by running '"git ls-remote ../a"'.
 
 Pulling down the submodules is a two-step process. First run `git submodule
 init` to add the submodule repository URLs to `.git/config`:
@@ -3660,7 +3660,7 @@ $ cat a.txt
 module a
 -------------------------------------------------
 
-NOTE: The changes are still visible in the submodule's reflog.
+*NOTE*: The changes are still visible in the submodule's `reflog`.
 
 This is not the case if you did not commit your changes.
 
@@ -3701,7 +3701,7 @@ between the working tree, the index, and the object database.  Git
 provides low-level operations which perform each of these steps
 individually.
 
-Generally, all "git" operations work on the index file. Some operations
+Generally, all git operations work on the index file. Some operations
 work *purely* on the index file (showing the current state of the
 index), but most operations move data between the index file and either
 the database or the working directory. Thus there are four main
@@ -3728,7 +3728,7 @@ To tell git that yes, you really do realize that certain files no
 longer exist, or that new files should be added, you
 should use the `--remove` and `--add` flags respectively.
 
-NOTE! A `--remove` flag does 'not' mean that subsequent filenames will
+*NOTE!* A `--remove` flag does *not* mean that subsequent filenames will
 necessarily be removed: if the files still exist in your directory
 structure, the index will be updated with their new status, not
 removed. The only thing `--remove` means is that update-index will be
@@ -3736,8 +3736,8 @@ considering a removed file to be a valid thing, and if the file really
 does not exist any more, it will update the index accordingly.
 
 As a special case, you can also do `git update-index --refresh`, which
-will refresh the "stat" information of each index to match the current
-stat information. It will 'not' update the object status itself, and
+will refresh the 'stat' information of each index to match the current
+stat information. It will *not* update the object status itself, and
 it will only update the fields that are used to quickly test whether
 an object still matches its old backing store object.
 
@@ -3748,7 +3748,7 @@ linkgit:git-update-index[1].
 index -> object database
 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 
-You write your current index file to a "tree" object with the program
+You write your current index file to a 'tree' object with the program
 
 -------------------------------------------------
 $ git write-tree
@@ -3764,7 +3764,7 @@ other direction:
 object database -> index
 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 
-You read a "tree" file from the object database, and use that to
+You read a 'tree' file from the object database, and use that to
 populate (and overwrite--don't do this if your index contains any
 unsaved state that you might want to restore later!) your current
 index.  Normal operation is just
@@ -3781,7 +3781,7 @@ directory contents have not been modified.
 index -> working directory
 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 
-You update your working directory from the index by "checking out"
+You update your working directory from the index by `checking out'
 files. This is not a very common operation, since normally you'd just
 keep your files updated, and rather than write to your working
 directory, you'd tell the index files about the changes in your
@@ -3798,9 +3798,9 @@ $ git checkout-index filename
 
 or, if you want to check out all of the index, use `-a`.
 
-NOTE! `git checkout-index` normally refuses to overwrite old files, so
+*NOTE!* `git checkout-index` normally refuses to overwrite old files, so
 if you have an old version of the tree already checked out, you will
-need to use the "-f" flag ('before' the "-a" flag or the filename) to
+need to use the `-f` flag (*before* the `-a` flag or the filename) to
 'force' the checkout.
 
 
@@ -3811,19 +3811,19 @@ from one representation to the other:
 Tying it all together
 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 
-To commit a tree you have instantiated with "git write-tree", you'd
-create a "commit" object that refers to that tree and the history
+To commit a tree you have instantiated with `git write-tree`, you'd
+create a 'commit' object that refers to that tree and the history
 behind it--most notably the "parent" commits that preceded it in
 history.
 
-Normally a "commit" has one parent: the previous state of the tree
+Normally a commit has one parent: the previous state of the tree
 before a certain change was made. However, sometimes it can have two
-or more parent commits, in which case we call it a "merge", due to the
-fact that such a commit brings together ("merges") two or more
+or more parent commits, in which case we call it a 'merge', due to the
+fact that such a commit brings together (merges) two or more
 previous states represented by other commits.
 
-In other words, while a "tree" represents a particular directory state
-of a working directory, a "commit" represents that state in "time",
+In other words, while a 'tree' represents a particular directory state
+of a working directory, a 'commit' represents that state in 'time',
 and explains how we got there.
 
 You create a commit object by giving it the tree that describes the
@@ -3903,12 +3903,12 @@ usually implicit in where you find the object), you can use
 $ git cat-file blob|tree|commit|tag <objectname>
 -------------------------------------------------
 
-to show its contents. NOTE! Trees have binary content, and as a result
+to show its contents. *NOTE!* Trees have binary content, and as a result
 there is a special helper for showing that content, called
 `git ls-tree`, which turns the binary content into a more easily
 readable form.
 
-It's especially instructive to look at "commit" objects, since those
+It's especially instructive to look at `commit` objects, since those
 tend to be small and fairly self-explanatory. In particular, if you
 follow the convention of having the top commit name in `.git/HEAD`,
 you can do
@@ -3925,16 +3925,16 @@ Merging multiple trees
 
 Git helps you do a three-way merge, which you can expand to n-way by
 repeating the merge procedure arbitrary times until you finally
-"commit" the state.  The normal situation is that you'd only do one
+'commit' the state.  The normal situation is that you'd only do one
 three-way merge (two parents), and commit it, but if you like to, you
 can do multiple parents in one go.
 
-To do a three-way merge, you need the two sets of "commit" objects
+To do a three-way merge, you need the two sets of 'commit' objects
 that you want to merge, use those to find the closest common parent (a
-third "commit" object), and then use those commit objects to find the
-state of the directory ("tree" object) at these points.
+third 'commit' object), and then use those commit objects to find the
+state of the directory ('tree' object) at these points.
 
-To get the "base" for the merge, you first look up the common parent
+To get the 'base' for the merge, you first look up the common parent
 of two commits with
 
 -------------------------------------------------
@@ -3942,7 +3942,7 @@ $ git merge-base <commit1> <commit2>
 -------------------------------------------------
 
 which will return you the commit they are both based on.  You should
-now look up the "tree" objects of those commits, which you can easily
+now look up the 'tree'; objects of those commits, which you can easily
 do with (for example)
 
 -------------------------------------------------
@@ -3952,9 +3952,9 @@ $ git cat-file commit <commitname> | head -1
 since the tree object information is always the first line in a commit
 object.
 
-Once you know the three trees you are going to merge (the one "original"
-tree, aka the common tree, and the two "result" trees, aka the branches
-you want to merge), you do a "merge" read into the index. This will
+Once you know the three trees you are going to merge (the one '`original''
+tree, aka the common tree, and the two '`result'' trees, aka the branches
+you want to merge), you do a 'merge' read into the index. This will
 complain if it has to throw away your old index contents, so you should
 make sure that you've committed those--in fact you would normally
 always do a merge against your last commit (which should thus match what
@@ -3978,7 +3978,7 @@ Merging multiple trees, continued
 Sadly, many merges aren't trivial. If there are files that have
 been added, moved or removed, or if both branches have modified the
 same file, you will be left with an index tree that contains "merge
-entries" in it. Such an index tree can 'NOT' be written out to a tree
+entries" in it. Such an index tree can *not* be written out to a tree
 object, and you will have to resolve any such merge clashes using
 other tools before you can write out the result.
 
@@ -3994,20 +3994,20 @@ $ git ls-files --unmerged
 ------------------------------------------------
 
 Each line of the `git ls-files --unmerged` output begins with
-the blob mode bits, blob SHA-1, 'stage number', and the
+the blob mode bits, blob `SHA-1`, 'stage number', and the
 filename.  The 'stage number' is git's way to say which tree it
-came from: stage 1 corresponds to `$orig` tree, stage 2 `HEAD`
-tree, and stage3 `$target` tree.
+came from: stage 1 corresponds to '$orig' tree, stage 2 'HEAD'
+tree, and stage3 '$target' tree.
 
 Earlier we said that trivial merges are done inside
 `git read-tree -m`.  For example, if the file did not change
-from `$orig` to `HEAD` nor `$target`, or if the file changed
-from `$orig` to `HEAD` and `$orig` to `$target` the same way,
-obviously the final outcome is what is in `HEAD`.  What the
-above example shows is that file `hello.c` was changed from
-`$orig` to `HEAD` and `$orig` to `$target` in a different way.
+from '$orig' to 'HEAD' nor '$target', or if the file changed
+from '$orig' to 'HEAD' and '$orig' to '$target' the same way,
+obviously the final outcome is what is in 'HEAD'.  What the
+above example shows is that file 'hello.c' was changed from
+'$orig' to 'HEAD' and '$orig' to '$target' in a different way.
 You could resolve this by running your favorite 3-way merge
-program, e.g.  `diff3`, `merge`, or git's own merge-file, on
+program, e.g.  'diff3', 'merge', or git's own `merge-file`, on
 the blob objects from these three stages yourself, like this:
 
 ------------------------------------------------
@@ -4017,7 +4017,7 @@ $ git cat-file blob cc44c73... >hello.c~3
 $ git merge-file hello.c~2 hello.c~1 hello.c~3
 ------------------------------------------------
 
-This would leave the merge result in `hello.c~2` file, along
+This would leave the merge result in 'hello.c~2' file, along
 with conflict markers if there are conflicts.  After verifying
 the merge result makes sense, you can tell git what the final
 merge result for this file is by:
@@ -4027,14 +4027,14 @@ $ mv -f hello.c~2 hello.c
 $ git update-index hello.c
 -------------------------------------------------
 
-When a path is in the "unmerged" state, running `git update-index` for
+When a path is in the 'unmerged' state, running `git update-index` for
 that path tells git to mark the path resolved.
 
 The above is the description of a git merge at the lowest level,
 to help you understand what conceptually happens under the hood.
 In practice, nobody, not even git itself, runs `git cat-file` three times
 for this.  There is a `git merge-index` program that extracts the
-stages to temporary files and calls a "merge" script on it:
+stages to temporary files and calls a 'merge' script on it:
 
 -------------------------------------------------
 $ git merge-index git-merge-one-file hello.c
@@ -4053,27 +4053,27 @@ probably only git developers need to understand.
 Object storage format
 ---------------------
 
-All objects have a statically determined "type" which identifies the
+All objects have a statically determined '"type"' which identifies the
 format of the object (i.e. how it is used, and how it can refer to other
-objects).  There are currently four different object types: "blob",
-"tree", "commit", and "tag".
+objects).  There are currently four different object types: 'blob',
+'tree', 'commit', and 'tag'.
 
 Regardless of object type, all objects share the following
 characteristics: they are all deflated with zlib, and have a header
 that not only specifies their type, but also provides size information
-about the data in the object.  It's worth noting that the SHA-1 hash
+about the data in the object.  It's worth noting that the `SHA-1` hash
 that is used to name the object is the hash of the original data
-plus this header, so `sha1sum` 'file' does not match the object name
+plus this header, so 'sha1sum file' does not match the object name
 for 'file'.
 (Historical note: in the dawn of the age of git the hash
-was the SHA-1 of the 'compressed' object.)
+was the `SHA-1` of the 'compressed' object.)
 
 As a result, the general consistency of an object can always be tested
 independently of the contents or the type of the object: all objects can
 be validated by verifying that (a) their hashes match the content of the
 file and (b) the object successfully inflates to a stream of bytes that
-forms a sequence of <ascii type without space> {plus} <space> {plus} <ascii decimal
-size> {plus} <byte\0> {plus} <binary object data>.
+forms a sequence of '"<ascii type without space> {plus} <space> {plus} <ascii decimal
+size> {plus} <byte\0> {plus} <binary object data>"'.
 
 The structured objects can further have their structure and
 connectivity to other objects verified. This is generally done with
@@ -4099,39 +4099,39 @@ The initial revision lays the foundation for almost everything git has
 today, but is small enough to read in one sitting.
 
 Note that terminology has changed since that revision.  For example, the
-README in that revision uses the word "changeset" to describe what we
+'README' in that revision uses the word '`changeset'' to describe what we
 now call a <<def_commit_object,commit>>.
 
-Also, we do not call it "cache" any more, but rather "index"; however, the
-file is still called `cache.h`.  Remark: Not much reason to change it now,
+Also, we do not call it 'cache' any more, but rather 'index'; however, the
+file is still called 'cache.h'.  Remark: Not much reason to change it now,
 especially since there is no good single name for it anyway, because it is
-basically _the_ header file which is included by _all_ of Git's C sources.
+basically *the* header file which is included by *all* of Git's C sources.
 
 If you grasp the ideas in that initial commit, you should check out a
-more recent version and skim `cache.h`, `object.h` and `commit.h`.
+more recent version and skim 'cache.h', 'object.h' and 'commit.h'.
 
 In the early days, Git (in the tradition of UNIX) was a bunch of programs
 which were extremely simple, and which you used in scripts, piping the
 output of one into another. This turned out to be good for initial
 development, since it was easier to test new things.  However, recently
 many of these parts have become builtins, and some of the core has been
-"libified", i.e. put into libgit.a for performance, portability reasons,
+``libified'', i.e. put into 'libgit.a' for performance, portability reasons,
 and to avoid code duplication.
 
 By now, you know what the index is (and find the corresponding data
-structures in `cache.h`), and that there are just a couple of object types
+structures in 'cache.h'), and that there are just a couple of object types
 (blobs, trees, commits and tags) which inherit their common structure from
-`struct object`, which is their first member (and thus, you can cast e.g.
-`(struct object *)commit` to achieve the _same_ as `&commit->object`, i.e.
+'"struct object"', which is their first member (and thus, you can cast e.g.
+'"(struct object *)commit"' to achieve the _same_ as '"&commit->object"', i.e.
 get at the object name and flags).
 
 Now is a good point to take a break to let this information sink in.
 
 Next step: get familiar with the object naming.  Read <<naming-commits>>.
 There are quite a few ways to name an object (and not only revisions!).
-All of these are handled in `sha1_name.c`. Just have a quick look at
-the function `get_sha1()`. A lot of the special handling is done by
-functions like `get_sha1_basic()` or the likes.
+All of these are handled in 'sha1_name.c'. Just have a quick look at
+the function 'get_sha1()'. A lot of the special handling is done by
+functions like 'get_sha1_basic()' or the likes.
 
 This is just to get you into the groove for the most libified part of Git:
 the revision walker.
@@ -4146,7 +4146,7 @@ $ git-rev-list --pretty $(git-rev-parse --default HEAD "$@") | \
 What does this mean?
 
 `git rev-list` is the original version of the revision walker, which
-_always_ printed a list of revisions to stdout.  It is still functional,
+*always* printed a list of revisions to stdout.  It is still functional,
 and needs to, since most new Git commands start out as scripts using
 `git rev-list`.
 
@@ -4154,38 +4154,38 @@ and needs to, since most new Git commands start out as scripts using
 options that were relevant for the different plumbing commands that were
 called by the script.
 
-Most of what `git rev-list` did is contained in `revision.c` and
-`revision.h`.  It wraps the options in a struct named `rev_info`, which
+Most of what `git rev-list` did is contained in 'revision.c' and
+'revision.h'.  It wraps the options in a struct named 'rev_info', which
 controls how and what revisions are walked, and more.
 
 The original job of `git rev-parse` is now taken by the function
-`setup_revisions()`, which parses the revisions and the common command line
+'setup_revisions()', which parses the revisions and the common command line
 options for the revision walker. This information is stored in the struct
-`rev_info` for later consumption. You can do your own command line option
-parsing after calling `setup_revisions()`. After that, you have to call
-`prepare_revision_walk()` for initialization, and then you can get the
-commits one by one with the function `get_revision()`.
+'rev_info' for later consumption. You can do your own command line option
+parsing after calling 'setup_revisions()'. After that, you have to call
+'prepare_revision_walk()' for initialization, and then you can get the
+commits one by one with the function 'get_revision()'.
 
 If you are interested in more details of the revision walking process,
-just have a look at the first implementation of `cmd_log()`; call
-`git show v1.3.0{tilde}155^2{tilde}4` and scroll down to that function (note that you
-no longer need to call `setup_pager()` directly).
+just have a look at the first implementation of 'cmd_log()'; call
+'"git show v1.3.0{tilde}155^2{tilde}4"' and scroll down to that function (note that you
+no longer need to call 'setup_pager()' directly).
 
-Nowadays, `git log` is a builtin, which means that it is _contained_ in the
+Nowadays, `git log` is a builtin, which means that it is *contained* in the
 command `git`.  The source side of a builtin is
 
-- a function called `cmd_<bla>`, typically defined in `builtin-<bla>.c`,
-  and declared in `builtin.h`,
+- a function called 'cmd_<bla>', typically defined in 'builtin-<bla>.c',
+  and declared in 'builtin.h',
 
-- an entry in the `commands[]` array in `git.c`, and
+- an entry in the 'commands[]' array in 'git.c', and
 
-- an entry in `BUILTIN_OBJECTS` in the `Makefile`.
+- an entry in 'BUILTIN_OBJECTS' in the 'Makefile'.
 
 Sometimes, more than one builtin is contained in one source file.  For
-example, `cmd_whatchanged()` and `cmd_log()` both reside in `builtin-log.c`,
+example, 'cmd_whatchanged()' and 'cmd_log()' both reside in 'builtin-log.c',
 since they share quite a bit of code.  In that case, the commands which are
-_not_ named like the `.c` file in which they live have to be listed in
-`BUILT_INS` in the `Makefile`.
+_not_ named like the '.c' file in which they live have to be listed in
+'BUILT_INS' in the 'Makefile'.
 
 `git log` looks more complicated in C than it does in the original script,
 but that allows for a much greater flexibility and performance.
@@ -4205,10 +4205,10 @@ For the sake of clarity, let's stay with `git cat-file`, because it
 - is plumbing, and
 
 - was around even in the initial commit (it literally went only through
-  some 20 revisions as `cat-file.c`, was renamed to `builtin-cat-file.c`
+  some 20 revisions as 'cat-file.c', was renamed to 'builtin-cat-file.c'
   when made a builtin, and then saw less than 10 versions).
 
-So, look into `builtin-cat-file.c`, search for `cmd_cat_file()` and look what
+So, look into 'builtin-cat-file.c', search for 'cmd_cat_file()' and look what
 it does.
 
 ------------------------------------------------------------------
@@ -4220,22 +4220,22 @@ it does.
 ------------------------------------------------------------------
 
 Let's skip over the obvious details; the only really interesting part
-here is the call to `get_sha1()`.  It tries to interpret `argv[2]` as an
+here is the call to 'get_sha1()'.  It tries to interpret 'argv[2]' as an
 object name, and if it refers to an object which is present in the current
-repository, it writes the resulting SHA-1 into the variable `sha1`.
+repository, it writes the resulting `SHA-1` into the variable 'sha1'.
 
 Two things are interesting here:
 
-- `get_sha1()` returns 0 on _success_.  This might surprise some new
+- 'get_sha1()' returns 0 on _success_.  This might surprise some new
   Git hackers, but there is a long tradition in UNIX to return different
   negative numbers in case of different errors--and 0 on success.
 
-- the variable `sha1` in the function signature of `get_sha1()` is `unsigned
-  char \*`, but is actually expected to be a pointer to `unsigned
-  char[20]`.  This variable will contain the 160-bit SHA-1 of the given
-  commit.  Note that whenever a SHA-1 is passed as `unsigned char \*`, it
+- the variable 'sha1' in the function signature of 'get_sha1()' is '"unsigned
+  char \*"', but is actually expected to be a pointer to '"unsigned
+  char[20]"'.  This variable will contain the 160-bit `SHA-1` of the given
+  commit.  Note that whenever a `SHA-1` is passed as '"unsigned char \*"', it
   is the binary representation, as opposed to the ASCII representation in
-  hex characters, which is passed as `char *`.
+  hex characters, which is passed as '"char *"'.
 
 You will see both of these things throughout the code.
 
@@ -4247,12 +4247,12 @@ Now, for the meat:
 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
 This is how you read a blob (actually, not only a blob, but any type of
-object).  To know how the function `read_object_with_reference()` actually
-works, find the source code for it (something like `git grep
-read_object_with | grep ":[a-z]"` in the git repository), and read
+object).  To know how the function 'read_object_with_reference()' actually
+works, find the source code for it (something like 'git grep
+read_object_with | grep ":[a-z]"' in the git repository), and read
 the source.
 
-To find out how the result can be used, just read on in `cmd_cat_file()`:
+To find out how the result can be used, just read on in 'cmd_cat_file()':
 
 -----------------------------------
         write_or_die(1, buf, size);
@@ -4263,15 +4263,15 @@ it helps to search through the output of `git log`, and then `git show` the
 corresponding commit.
 
 Example: If you know that there was some test case for `git bundle`, but
-do not remember where it was (yes, you _could_ `git grep bundle t/`, but that
+do not remember where it was (yes, you _could_ '"git grep bundle t/"', but that
 does not illustrate the point!):
 
 ------------------------
 $ git log --no-merges t/
 ------------------------
 
-In the pager (`less`), just search for "bundle", go a few lines back,
-and see that it is in commit 18449ab0...  Now just copy this object name,
+In the pager ('less'), just search for '"bundle"', go a few lines back,
+and see that it is in commit '18449ab0...'  Now just copy this object name,
 and paste it into the command line
 
 -------------------
@@ -4336,7 +4336,7 @@ $ git branch new     # create branch "new" starting at current HEAD
 $ git branch -d new  # delete branch "new"
 -----------------------------------------------
 
-Instead of basing a new branch on current HEAD (the default), use:
+Instead of basing a new branch on current `HEAD` (the default), use:
 
 -----------------------------------------------
 $ git branch new test    # branch named "test"
@@ -4501,7 +4501,7 @@ branch with your commits:
 $ git push ssh://example.com/project.git mybranch:theirbranch
 -----------------------------------------------
 
-When remote and local branch are both named "test":
+When remote and local branch are both named '"test"':
 
 -----------------------------------------------
 $ git push ssh://example.com/project.git test
@@ -4545,14 +4545,14 @@ The basic requirements:
   should be specifically mentioned as they arise.
 - Whenever possible, section headings should clearly describe the task
   they explain how to do, in language that requires no more knowledge
-  than necessary: for example, "importing patches into a project" rather
-  than "the `git am` command"
+  than necessary: for example, ``importing patches into a project'' rather
+  than ``the `git am` command''
 
 Think about how to create a clear chapter dependency graph that will
 allow people to get to important topics without necessarily reading
 everything in between.
 
-Scan Documentation/ for other stuff left out; in particular:
+Scan 'Documentation/' for other stuff left out; in particular:
 
 - howto's
 - some of technical/?
-- 
1.6.6.1

Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] user-manual: general quoting improvements (p1)

[Daniel]

> This standarizes the way quotes are handled following semantic rules,
> that make the final text easier to read.
> 
> Here are the general rules:
> 
>  * A command (something that the user must type), goes in backticks. So
>    that the final text appears in monospaced text. e.g. `git clone
>    <repo>`
> 
>  * A common concept (or git lingo), also goes in backticks. So that it
>    appears uniquely different from the rest of the text. e.g. `HEAD`
> 
>  * An example (something that can be easily replaced), goes into
>    typewriter quotes. The final text is not formatted further, so they
>    still appear as typewriter quotes. e.g. "linux-2.6"
> 
>  * A text that can be confused with normal text also goes into
>    typewriter quotes. e.g. "path/to/file" "A"
> 
>  * Text that needs to be emphasized goes in single typewriter quotes. So
>    that it's not confused as normal text. e.g. we often just use the
>    term 'branch'.
> 
>  * Something that needs proper quotation goes into proper double quotes.
>    So that it gets a dramatic effect, as in sombody is using his four
>    quoting fingers. e.g. ``the index''
> 
>  * Something that needs strong emphasis so that the reader can't
>    possibly miss it goes enclosed in asterisks. e.g. *not* tracking
> 
> These rules are not automatic, which one to use depends on the context,
> and often they can be used together. For example, consider this:
> 
> 	The branch 'test' is short for '"refs/heads/test"'
> 
> In this case we want to highligh 'test' and 'refs/heads/test' so they go
> in single typewriter quotes, but also, we want to make clear the full
> refname is not confused as multiple words, so it goes inside double
> typewriter quotes.
> 
> Also, sometimes a text can be both a command, and an example, but only
> one quoting format must be chosen.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>

Maybe [regardless of its meritorical corectness) this is worth putting
in a separate file in Documentation/ so that people sending patches to
documentation will at least have a chance to read quoting rules and not
use quotes randomly.

-- Daniel