Re: [PATCH] git-rev-list.txt: rev stands for revision, not reverse.

[Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>]

Ralf Wildenhues <Ralf.Wildenhues@gmx.de> writes:

> Mention revs, revisions as aliases for commit objects,
> to clarify that rev-list is not an abbreviation for
> listing in reverse order, but for listing revisions.
> ---
> Yes, believe it or not, but I stumbled over the synopsis
>
> | git-rev-list - Lists commit objects in reverse chronological order
>
> asking myself whether rev could possibly mean "reverse".
> I hope this helps avoid this pitfall for others.

In addition to your patch,

	git-rev-list - List commits from most recent to older

might be a good rewording?  "rev-list --reverse" reverses that
usual order and we end up explaining double reversal if we use
the phrase "reverse chronological order" to describe the normal
order.