Documentation: add git user's manual

The goals are:

	- Readable from beginning to end in order without having read
	  any other git documentation beforehand.
	- Helpful section names and cross-references, so it's not too
	  hard to skip around some if you need to.
	- Organized to allow it to grow much larger (unlike the
	  tutorials)

It's more liesurely than tutorial.txt, but tries to stay focused on
practical how-to stuff.  It adds a discussion of how to resolve merge
conflicts, and partial instructions on setting up and dealing with a
public repository.

I've lifted a little bit from "branching and merging" (e.g., some of the
discussion of history diagrams), and could probably steal more if that's
OK.  (Similarly anyone should of course feel free to reuse bits of this
if any parts seem more useful than the whole.)

There's a lot of detail on managing branches and using git-fetch, just
because those are essential even to people needing read-only access
(e.g., kernel testers).  I think those sections will be much shorter
once the new "git remote" command and the disconnected checkouts are
taken into account.

I do feel bad about adding yet another piece of documentation, but I we
need something that goes through all the basics in a logical order, and
I wasn't seeing how to grow the tutorials into that.

Signed-off-by: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@citi.umich.edu>

4 files changed, 1774 insertions, 1 deletions

diff --git a/Documentation/Makefile b/Documentation/Makefile
index 93c7024..c2ee5b4 100644
--- a/Documentation/Makefile
+++ b/Documentation/Makefile
@@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ ARTICLES += hooks
 ARTICLES += everyday
 ARTICLES += git-tools
 # with their own formatting rules.
-SP_ARTICLES = glossary howto/revert-branch-rebase
+SP_ARTICLES = glossary howto/revert-branch-rebase user-manual
 
 DOC_HTML += $(patsubst %,%.html,$(ARTICLES) $(SP_ARTICLES))
 
@@ -89,6 +89,12 @@ clean:
 %.xml : %.txt
 	asciidoc -b docbook -d manpage -f asciidoc.conf $<
 
+user-manual.xml: user-manual.txt user-manual.conf
+	asciidoc -b docbook -d book $<
+
+user-manual.html: user-manual.xml
+	xmlto -m /etc/asciidoc/docbook-xsl/xhtml.xsl html-nochunks $<
+
 git.html: git.txt README
 
 glossary.html : glossary.txt sort_glossary.pl
diff --git a/Documentation/docbook-xsl.css b/Documentation/docbook-xsl.css
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..8821e30
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/docbook-xsl.css
@@ -0,0 +1,286 @@
+/*

+  CSS stylesheet for XHTML produced by DocBook XSL stylesheets.

+  Tested with XSL stylesheets 1.61.2, 1.67.2

+*/

+

+span.strong {

+  font-weight: bold;

+}

+

+body blockquote {

+  margin-top: .75em;

+  line-height: 1.5;

+  margin-bottom: .75em;

+}

+

+html body {

+  margin: 1em 5% 1em 5%;

+  line-height: 1.2;

+}

+

+body div {

+  margin: 0;

+}

+

+h1, h2, h3, h4, h5, h6,

+div.toc p b,

+div.list-of-figures p b,

+div.list-of-tables p b,

+div.abstract p.title

+{

+  color: #527bbd;

+  font-family: tahoma, verdana, sans-serif;

+}

+

+div.toc p:first-child,

+div.list-of-figures p:first-child,

+div.list-of-tables p:first-child,

+div.example p.title

+{

+  margin-bottom: 0.2em;

+}

+

+body h1 {

+  margin: .0em 0 0 -4%;

+  line-height: 1.3;

+  border-bottom: 2px solid silver;

+}

+

+body h2 {

+  margin: 0.5em 0 0 -4%;

+  line-height: 1.3;

+  border-bottom: 2px solid silver;

+}

+

+body h3 {

+  margin: .8em 0 0 -3%;

+  line-height: 1.3;

+}

+

+body h4 {

+  margin: .8em 0 0 -3%;

+  line-height: 1.3;

+}

+

+body h5 {

+  margin: .8em 0 0 -2%;

+  line-height: 1.3;

+}

+

+body h6 {

+  margin: .8em 0 0 -1%;

+  line-height: 1.3;

+}

+

+body hr {

+  border: none; /* Broken on IE6 */

+}

+div.footnotes hr {

+  border: 1px solid silver;

+}

+

+div.navheader th, div.navheader td, div.navfooter td {

+  font-family: sans-serif;

+  font-size: 0.9em;

+  font-weight: bold;

+  color: #527bbd;

+}

+div.navheader img, div.navfooter img {

+  border-style: none;

+}

+div.navheader a, div.navfooter a {

+  font-weight: normal;

+}

+div.navfooter hr {

+  border: 1px solid silver;

+}

+

+body td {

+  line-height: 1.2

+}

+

+body th {

+  line-height: 1.2;

+}

+

+ol {

+  line-height: 1.2;

+}

+

+ul, body dir, body menu {

+  line-height: 1.2;

+}

+

+html {

+  margin: 0; 

+  padding: 0;

+}

+

+body h1, body h2, body h3, body h4, body h5, body h6 {

+  margin-left: 0

+} 

+

+body pre {

+  margin: 0.5em 10% 0.5em 1em;

+  line-height: 1.0;

+  color: navy;

+}

+

+tt.literal, code.literal {

+  color: navy;

+}

+

+div.literallayout p {

+  padding: 0em;

+  margin: 0em;

+}

+

+div.literallayout {

+  font-family: monospace;

+#  margin: 0.5em 10% 0.5em 1em;

+  margin: 0em;

+  color: navy;

+  border: 1px solid silver;

+  background: #f4f4f4;

+  padding: 0.5em;

+}

+

+.programlisting, .screen {

+  border: 1px solid silver;

+  background: #f4f4f4;

+  margin: 0.5em 10% 0.5em 0;

+  padding: 0.5em 1em;

+}

+

+div.sidebar {

+  background: #ffffee;

+  margin: 1.0em 10% 0.5em 0;

+  padding: 0.5em 1em;

+  border: 1px solid silver;

+}

+div.sidebar * { padding: 0; }

+div.sidebar div { margin: 0; }

+div.sidebar p.title {

+  font-family: sans-serif;

+  margin-top: 0.5em;

+  margin-bottom: 0.2em;

+}

+

+div.bibliomixed {

+  margin: 0.5em 5% 0.5em 1em;

+}

+

+div.glossary dt {

+  font-weight: bold;

+}

+div.glossary dd p {

+  margin-top: 0.2em;

+}

+

+dl {

+  margin: .8em 0;

+  line-height: 1.2;

+}

+

+dt {

+  margin-top: 0.5em;

+}

+

+dt span.term {

+  font-style: italic;

+}

+

+div.variablelist dd p {

+  margin-top: 0;

+}

+

+div.itemizedlist li, div.orderedlist li {

+  margin-left: -0.8em;

+  margin-top: 0.5em;

+}

+

+ul, ol {

+    list-style-position: outside;

+}

+

+div.sidebar ul, div.sidebar ol {

+    margin-left: 2.8em;

+}

+

+div.itemizedlist p.title,

+div.orderedlist p.title,

+div.variablelist p.title

+{

+  margin-bottom: -0.8em;

+}

+

+div.revhistory table {

+  border-collapse: collapse;

+  border: none;

+}

+div.revhistory th {

+  border: none;

+  color: #527bbd;

+  font-family: tahoma, verdana, sans-serif;

+}

+div.revhistory td {

+  border: 1px solid silver;

+}

+

+/* Keep TOC and index lines close together. */

+div.toc dl, div.toc dt,

+div.list-of-figures dl, div.list-of-figures dt,

+div.list-of-tables dl, div.list-of-tables dt,

+div.indexdiv dl, div.indexdiv dt

+{

+  line-height: normal;

+  margin-top: 0;

+  margin-bottom: 0;

+}

+

+/*

+  Table styling does not work because of overriding attributes in

+  generated HTML.

+*/

+div.table table,

+div.informaltable table

+{

+    margin-left: 0;

+    margin-right: 5%;

+    margin-bottom: 0.8em;

+}

+div.informaltable table

+{

+    margin-top: 0.4em

+}

+div.table thead,

+div.table tfoot,

+div.table tbody,

+div.informaltable thead,

+div.informaltable tfoot,

+div.informaltable tbody

+{

+    /* No effect in IE6. */

+    border-top: 2px solid #527bbd;

+    border-bottom: 2px solid #527bbd;

+}

+div.table thead, div.table tfoot,

+div.informaltable thead, div.informaltable tfoot

+{

+    font-weight: bold;

+}

+

+div.mediaobject img {

+    border: 1px solid silver;

+    margin-bottom: 0.8em;

+}

+div.figure p.title,

+div.table p.title

+{

+  margin-top: 1em;

+  margin-bottom: 0.4em;

+}

+

+@media print {

+  div.navheader, div.navfooter { display: none; }

+}

diff --git a/Documentation/user-manual.conf b/Documentation/user-manual.conf
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..92b01ecf
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/user-manual.conf
@@ -0,0 +1,21 @@
+[titles]
+	underlines="__","==","--","~~","^^"
+
+[attributes]
+caret=^
+startsb=&#91;
+endsb=&#93;
+tilde=&#126;
+
+[gitlink-inlinemacro]
+<ulink url="{target}.html">{target}{0?({0})}</ulink>
+
+ifdef::backend-docbook[]
+# "unbreak" docbook-xsl v1.68 for manpages. v1.69 works with or without this.
+[listingblock]
+<example><title>{title}</title>
+<literallayout>
+|
+</literallayout>
+{title#}</example>
+endif::backend-docbook[]
diff --git a/Documentation/user-manual.txt b/Documentation/user-manual.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..30ad103
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/user-manual.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,1460 @@
+Git User's Manual
+_________________
+
+This manual is designed to be readable by someone with basic unix
+commandline skills, but no previous knowledge of git.
+
+Comprehensive reference documentation is available through the man
+pages.  For a command such as "git clone", just use
+
+------------------------------------------------
+$ man git-clone
+------------------------------------------------
+
+Repositories and Branches
+=========================
+
+How to get a git repository
+---------------------------
+
+It will be useful to have a git repository to experiment with as you
+read this manual.
+
+The best way to get one is by using the gitlink:git-clone[1] command
+to download a copy of an existing repository for a project that you
+are interested in.  If you don't already have a project in mind, here
+are some interesting examples:
+
+------------------------------------------------
+	# git itself (approx. 10MB download):
+$ git clone git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/git/git.git
+	# the linux kernel (approx. 150MB download):
+$ 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
+directory, you will see that it contains a copy of the project files,
+together with a special top-level directory named ".git", which
+contains all the information about the history of the project.
+
+In the following, examples will be taken from one of the two
+repositories above.
+
+How to check out a different version of a project
+-------------------------------------------------
+
+Git is best thought of as a tool for storing the history of a
+collection of files.  It stores the history as a compressed
+collection of interrelated snapshots (versions) of the project's
+contents.
+
+A single git repository may contain multiple branches.  Each branch
+is a bookmark referencing a particular point in the project history.
+The gitlink:git-branch[1] command shows you the list of branches:
+
+------------------------------------------------
+$ git branch
+* master
+------------------------------------------------
+
+A freshly cloned repository contains a single branch, named "master",
+and the working directory contains the version of the project
+referred to by the master branch.
+
+Most projects also use tags.  Tags, like branches, are references
+into the project's history, and can be listed using the
+gitlink:git-tag[1] command:
+
+------------------------------------------------
+$ git tag -l
+v2.6.11
+v2.6.11-tree
+v2.6.12
+v2.6.12-rc2
+v2.6.12-rc3
+v2.6.12-rc4
+v2.6.12-rc5
+v2.6.12-rc6
+v2.6.13
+...
+------------------------------------------------
+
+Create a new branch pointing to one of these versions and check it
+out using gitlink:git-checkout[1]:
+
+------------------------------------------------
+$ 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 gitlink:git-branch[1] shows two
+branches, with an asterisk marking the currently checked-out branch:
+
+------------------------------------------------
+$ git branch
+  master
+* new
+------------------------------------------------
+
+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
+
+------------------------------------------------
+$ git reset --hard v2.6.17
+------------------------------------------------
+
+Note that if the current branch was your only reference to a
+particular point in history, then resetting that branch may leave you
+with no way to find the history it used to point to; so use this
+command carefully.
+
+Understanding History: Commits
+------------------------------
+
+Every change in the history of a project is represented by a commit.
+The gitlink:git-show[1] command shows the most recent commit on the
+current branch:
+
+------------------------------------------------
+$ git show
+commit 2b5f6dcce5bf94b9b119e9ed8d537098ec61c3d2
+Author: Jamal Hadi Salim <hadi@cyberus.ca>
+Date:   Sat Dec 2 22:22:25 2006 -0800
+
+    [XFRM]: Fix aevent structuring to be more complete.
+    
+    aevents can not uniquely identify an SA. We break the ABI with this
+    patch, but consensus is that since it is not yet utilized by any
+    (known) application then it is fine (better do it now than later).
+    
+    Signed-off-by: Jamal Hadi Salim <hadi@cyberus.ca>
+    Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
+
+diff --git a/Documentation/networking/xfrm_sync.txt b/Documentation/networking/xfrm_sync.txt
+index 8be626f..d7aac9d 100644
+--- a/Documentation/networking/xfrm_sync.txt
++++ b/Documentation/networking/xfrm_sync.txt
+@@ -47,10 +47,13 @@ aevent_id structure looks like:
+ 
+    struct xfrm_aevent_id {
+              struct xfrm_usersa_id           sa_id;
++             xfrm_address_t                  saddr;
+              __u32                           flags;
++             __u32                           reqid;
+    };
+...
+------------------------------------------------
+
+As you can see, a commit shows who made the latest change, what they
+did, and why.
+
+Every commit has a 20-digit id, sometimes called the "SHA1 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 id can also be useful.  In particular, it is a globally unique
+name for this commit: so if you tell somebody else the SHA1 id (for
+example in email), then you are guaranteed they will see the same
+commit in their repository that you do in yours.
+
+Understanding history: commits, parents, and reachability
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+Every commit (except the very first commit in a project) also has a
+parent commit which shows what happened before this commit.
+Following the chain of parents will eventually take you back to the
+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
+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 gitlink:gitk[1]
+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 descendent of X, or that there is a chain of parents
+leading from commit Y to commit X.
+
+Undestanding 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
+lines drawn with - / and \.  Time goes left to right:
+
+         o--o--o <-- Branch A
+        /
+ o--o--o <-- master
+        \
+         o--o--o <-- Branch B
+
+If we need to talk about a particular commit, the character "o" may
+be replaced with another letter or number.
+
+Understanding history: What is a branch?
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+Though we've been using the word "branch" to mean a kind of reference
+to a particular commit, the word branch is also commonly used to
+refer to the line of commits leading up to that point.  In the
+example above, git may think of the branch named "A" as just a
+pointer to one particular commit, but we may refer informally to the
+line of three commits leading up to that point as all being part of
+"branch A".
+
+If we need to make it clear that we're just talking about the most
+recent commit on the branch, we may refer to that commit as the
+"head" of the branch.
+
+Manipulating branches
+---------------------
+
+Creating, deleting, and modifying branches is quick and easy; here's
+a summary of the commands:
+
+git branch::
+	list all branches
+git branch <branch>::
+	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,
+	including using a branch name or a tag name
+git branch -d <branch>::
+	delete the branch <branch>; if the branch you are deleting
+	points to a commit which is not reachable from this branch,
+	this command will fail with a warning.
+git branch -D <branch>::
+	even if the branch points to a commit not reachable
+	from the current branch, you may know that that commit
+	is still reachable from some other branch or tag.  In that
+	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>
+git checkout -b <new> <start-point>::
+	create a new branch <new> referencing <start-point>, and
+	check it out.
+
+It is also useful to know that the special symbol "HEAD" can always
+be used to refer to the current 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
+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 gitlink:git-branch[1]:
+
+------------------------------------------------
+$ git branch -r
+  origin/HEAD
+  origin/html
+  origin/maint
+  origin/man
+  origin/master
+  origin/next
+  origin/pu
+  origin/todo
+------------------------------------------------
+
+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
+to refer to the repository that you cloned from.
+
+[[how-git-stores-references]]
+How git stores references
+-------------------------
+
+Branches, remote-tracking branches, and tags are all references to
+commits.  Git stores these references in the ".git" directory.  Most
+of them are stored in .git/refs/:
+
+	- branches are stored in .git/refs/heads
+	- tags are stored in .git/refs/tags
+	- remote-tracking branches for "origin" are stored in
+	  .git/refs/remotes/origin/
+
+If you look at one of these files you will see that they usually
+contain just the SHA1 id of a commit:
+
+------------------------------------------------
+$ ls .git/refs/heads/
+master
+$ cat .git/refs/heads/master
+c0f982dcf188d55db9d932a39d4ea7becaa55fed
+------------------------------------------------
+
+You can refer to a reference by its path relative to the .git
+directory.  However, we've seen above that git will also accept
+shorter names; for example, "master" is an acceptable shortcut for
+"refs/heads/master", and "origin/master" is a shortcut for
+"refs/remotes/origin/master".
+
+As another useful shortcut, you can also refer to the "HEAD" of
+"origin" (or any other remote), using just the name of the remote.
+
+For the complete list of paths which git checks for references, and
+how it decides which to choose when there are multiple references
+with the same name, see the "SPECIFYING REVISIONS" section of
+gitlink:git-rev-parse[1].
+
+[[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
+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.
+
+Fetching individual branches
+----------------------------
+
+You can also choose to update just one branch at a time:
+
+-------------------------------------------------
+$ git fetch origin todo:refs/remotes/origin/todo
+-------------------------------------------------
+
+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/remotes/origin/todo; as we saw
+above, remote-tracking branches are stored under
+refs/remotes/<name-of-repository>/<name-of-branch>.
+
+You can also fetch branches from other repositories; so
+
+-------------------------------------------------
+$ git fetch git://example.com/proj.git master:refs/remotes/example/master
+-------------------------------------------------
+
+will create a new reference named "refs/remotes/example/master" and
+store in it the branch named "master" from the repository at the
+given URL.  If you already have a branch named
+"refs/remotes/example/master", it will attempt to "fast-forward" to
+the commit given by example.com's master branch.  So next we explain
+what a fast-forward is:
+
+[[fast-forwards]]
+Understanding git history: fast-forwards
+----------------------------------------
+
+In the previous example, when updating an existing branch, "git
+fetch" checks to make sure that the most recent commit on the remote
+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 forward".
+
+A fast forward looks something like this:
+
+ o--o--o--o <-- old head of the branch
+           \
+            o--o--o <-- new head of the branch
+
+
+In some cases it is possible that the new head will *not* actually be
+a descendant of the old head.  For example, the developer may have
+realized she made a serious mistake, and decided to backtrack,
+resulting in a situation like:
+
+ o--o--o--o--a--b <-- old head of the branch
+           \
+            o--o--o <-- new head of the branch
+
+
+
+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",
+unless you've already created a reference of your own pointing to
+them.
+
+Forcing git fetch to do non-fast-forward updates
+------------------------------------------------
+
+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.  Be aware that commits which the
+old version of example/master pointed at may be lost, as we saw in
+the previous section.
+
+Configuring remote branches
+---------------------------
+
+We saw above that "origin" is just a shortcut to refer to the
+repository which you originally cloned from.  This information is
+stored in git configuration variables, which you can see using
+gitlink:git-repo-config[1]:
+
+-------------------------------------------------
+$ git-repo-config -l
+core.repositoryformatversion=0
+core.filemode=true
+core.logallrefupdates=true
+remote.origin.url=git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/git/git.git
+remote.origin.fetch=+refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/origin/*
+branch.master.remote=origin
+branch.master.merge=refs/heads/master
+-------------------------------------------------
+
+If there are other repositories that you also use frequently, you can
+create similar configuration options to save typing; for example,
+after
+
+-------------------------------------------------
+$ git repo-config remote.example.url=git://example.com/proj.git
+-------------------------------------------------
+
+then the following two commands will do the same thing:
+
+-------------------------------------------------
+$ git fetch git://example.com/proj.git master:refs/remotes/example/master
+$ git fetch example master:refs/remotes/example/master
+-------------------------------------------------
+
+Even better, if you add one more option:
+
+-------------------------------------------------
+$ git repo-config remote.example.fetch=master:refs/remotes/example/master
+-------------------------------------------------
+
+then the following commands will all do the same thing:
+
+-------------------------------------------------
+$ git fetch git://example.com/proj.git master:ref/remotes/example/master
+$ git fetch example master:ref/remotes/example/master
+$ git fetch example example/master
+$ git fetch example
+-------------------------------------------------
+
+You can also add a "+" to force the update each time:
+
+-------------------------------------------------
+$ git repo-config +master:ref/remotes/example/master
+-------------------------------------------------
+
+Don't do this unless you're sure you won't mind "git fetch" possibly
+throwing away commits on mybranch.
+
+Also note that all of the above configuration can be performed by
+directly editing the file .git/config instead of using
+gitlink:git-repo-config[1].
+
+See gitlink:git-repo-config[1] for more details on the configuration
+options mentioned above.
+
+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 heirarchy, together with "commits" which show
+the relationships between these snapshots.
+
+Git provides extremely flexible and fast tools for exploring the
+history of a project.
+
+We start with one specialized tool which is useful for finding the
+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
+regression is to perform a brute-force search through the project's
+history to find the particular commit that caused the problem.  The
+gitlink:git-bisect[1] command can help you do this:
+
+-------------------------------------------------
+$ git bisect start
+$ git bisect good v2.6.18
+$ git bisect bad master
+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 to a new branch named "bisect".  This branch
+points to a commit (with commit id 65934...) that is reachable from
+v2.6.19 but not from v2.6.18.  Compile and test it, and see whether
+it crashes.  Assume it does crash.  Then:
+
+-------------------------------------------------
+$ git bisect bad
+Bisecting: 1769 revisions left to test after this
+[7eff82c8b1511017ae605f0c99ac275a7e21b867] i2c-core: Drop useless bitmaskings
+-------------------------------------------------
+
+checks out an older version.  Continue like this, telling git at each
+stage whether the version it gives you is good or bad, and notice
+that the number of revisions left to test is cut approximately in
+half each time.
+
+After about 13 tests (in this case), it will output the commit id of
+the guilty commit.  You can then examine the commit with
+gitlink:git-show[1], find out who wrote it, and mail them your bug
+report with the commit id.  Finally, run
+
+-------------------------------------------------
+$ git bisect reset
+-------------------------------------------------
+
+to return you to the branch you were on before and delete the
+temporary "bisect" branch.
+
+Note that the version which git-bisect checks out for you at each
+point is just a suggestion, and you're free to try a different
+version if you think it would be a good idea.  For example,
+occasionally you may land on a commit that broke something unrelated;
+run
+
+-------------------------------------------------
+$ git bisect-visualize
+-------------------------------------------------
+
+which will run gitk and label the commit it chose with a marker that
+says "bisect".  Chose 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
+continue.
+
+Naming commits
+--------------
+
+We have seen several ways of naming commits already:
+
+	- 20-digit SHA1 id
+	- branch name: refers to the commit at the head of the given
+	  branch
+	- tag name: refers to the commit pointed to by the given tag
+	  (we've seen branches and tags are special cases of
+	  <<how-git-stores-references,references>>).
+	- HEAD: refers to the head of the current branch
+
+There are many more; see the "SPECIFYING REVISION" section of the
+gitlink:git-rev-list[1] man page for the complete list of ways to
+name revisions.  Some examples:
+
+-------------------------------------------------
+$ git show fb47ddb2 # the first few characters of the SHA1 id
+		    # are usually enough to specify it uniquely
+$ git show HEAD^    # the parent of the HEAD commit
+$ git show HEAD^^   # the grandparent
+$ 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
+also choose:
+
+-------------------------------------------------
+$ 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
+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.
+
+The git-fetch operation always stores the head of the last fetched
+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.
+
+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.
+
+Creating tags
+-------------
+
+We can also create a tag to refer to a particular commit; after
+running
+
+-------------------------------------------------
+$ git-tag stable-1 1b2e1d63ff
+-------------------------------------------------
+
+You can use stable-1 to refer to the commit 1b2e1d63ff.
+
+This creates a "lightweight" tag.  If the tag is a tag you wish to
+share with others, and possibly sign cryptographically, then you
+should create a tag object instead; see the gitlink:git-tag[1] man
+page for details.
+
+Browsing revisions
+------------------
+
+The gitlink:git-log[1] command can show lists of commits.  On its
+own, it shows all commits reachable from the parent commit; but you
+can also make more specific requests:
+
+-------------------------------------------------
+$ git log v2.5..	# commits since (not reachable from) v2.5
+$ git log test..master	# commits reachable from master but not test
+$ git log master..test	# ...reachable from test but not master
+$ git log master...test	# ...reachable from either test or master,
+			#    but not both
+$ git log --since="2 weeks ago" # commits from the last 2 weeks
+$ git log Makefile      # commits which modify Makefile
+$ git log fs/		# ... which modify any file under fs/
+$ git log -S'foo()'	# commits which add or remove any file data
+			# matching the string 'foo()'
+-------------------------------------------------
+
+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:
+
+-------------------------------------------------
+$ git log v2.5.. Makefile fs/
+-------------------------------------------------
+
+You can also ask git log to show patches:
+
+-------------------------------------------------
+$ git log -p
+-------------------------------------------------
+
+See the "--pretty" option in the gitlink:git-log[1] man page for more
+display options.
+
+Note that git log starts with the most recent commit and works
+backwards through the parents; however, since git history can contain
+multiple independant lines of development, the particular order that
+commits are listed in may be somewhat arbitrary.
+
+Generating diffs
+----------------
+
+You can generate diffs between any two versions using
+gitlink:git-diff[1]:
+
+-------------------------------------------------
+$ git diff master..test
+-------------------------------------------------
+
+Sometimes what you want instead is a set of patches:
+
+-------------------------------------------------
+$ git format-patch master..test
+-------------------------------------------------
+
+will generate a file with a patch for each commit reachable from test
+but not from master.  Note that if master also has commits which are
+not reachable from test, then the combined result of these patches
+will not be the same as the diff produced by the git-diff example.
+
+Viewing old file versions
+-------------------------
+
+You can always view an old version of a file by just checking out the
+correct revision first.  But sometimes it is more convenient to be
+able to view an old version of a single file without checking
+anything out; this command does that:
+
+-------------------------------------------------
+$ git show v2.5:fs/locks.c
+-------------------------------------------------
+
+Before the colon may be anything that names a commit, and after it
+may be any path to a file tracked by git.
+
+Developing with git
+===================
+
+Telling git your name
+---------------------
+
+Before creating any commits, you should introduce yourself to git.  The
+easiest way to do so is:
+
+------------------------------------------------
+$ cat >~/.gitconfig <<\EOF
+[user]
+	name = Your Name Comes Here
+	email = you@yourdomain.example.com
+EOF
+------------------------------------------------
+
+
+Creating a new repository
+-------------------------
+
+Creating a new repository from scratch is very easy:
+
+-------------------------------------------------
+$ mkdir project
+$ cd project
+$ git init-db
+-------------------------------------------------
+
+If you have some initial content (say, a tarball):
+
+-------------------------------------------------
+$ tar -xzvf project.tar.gz
+$ cd project
+$ git init-db
+$ git add . # include everything below ./ in the first commit:
+$ git commit
+-------------------------------------------------
+
+[[how-to-make-a-commit]]
+how to make a commit
+--------------------
+
+Creating a new commit takes three steps:
+
+	1. Making some changes to the working directory using your
+	   favorite editor.
+	2. Telling git about your changes.
+	3. Creating the commit using the content you told git about
+	   in step 2.
+
+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."
+
+By default, the content of the index is identical to that of the
+HEAD.  The command "git diff --cached" shows the difference between
+HEAD and the index, so you should no output from that command.
+
+Modifying the index is easy:
+
+To update the index with the new contents of a modified file, use
+
+-------------------------------------------------
+$ git add path/to/file
+-------------------------------------------------
+
+To add the contents of a new file to the index, use
+
+-------------------------------------------------
+$ git add path/to/file
+-------------------------------------------------
+
+To remove a file from the index that you've removed from the working
+tree,
+
+-------------------------------------------------
+$ git rm path/to/file
+-------------------------------------------------
+
+After each step you can verify that
+
+-------------------------------------------------
+$ git diff --cached
+-------------------------------------------------
+
+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
+
+-------------------------------------------------
+$ git diff
+-------------------------------------------------
+
+shows the difference between the working tree and the index file.
+
+Note that "git add" always adds just the current contents of a file
+to the index; further changes to the same file will be ignored unless
+you run git-add on the file again.
+
+When you're ready, just run
+
+-------------------------------------------------
+$ git commit
+-------------------------------------------------
+
+and git will prompt you for a commit message and then create the new
+commmit.  Check to make sure it looks like what you expected with
+
+-------------------------------------------------
+$ git show
+-------------------------------------------------
+
+As a special shortcut,
+		
+-------------------------------------------------
+$ git commit -a
+-------------------------------------------------
+
+will update the index with any files that you've modified or removed
+and create a commit, all in one step.
+
+A number of commands are useful for keeping track of what you're
+about to commit:
+
+-------------------------------------------------
+$ git diff --cached # difference between HEAD and the index; what
+		    # would be commited if you ran "commit" now.
+$ git diff	    # difference between the index file and your
+		    # working directory; changes that would not
+		    # be included if you ran "commit" now.
+$ git status	    # a brief per-file summary of the above.
+-------------------------------------------------
+
+creating good commit messages
+-----------------------------
+
+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
+body.
+
+how to merge
+------------
+
+You can rejoin two diverging branches of development using
+gitlink:git-merge[1]:
+
+-------------------------------------------------
+$ git merge branchname
+-------------------------------------------------
+
+merges the development in the branch "branchname" into the current
+branch.  If there are conflicts--for example, if the same file is
+modified in two different ways in the remote branch and the local
+branch--then you are warned; the output may look something like this:
+
+-------------------------------------------------
+$ git pull . next
+Trying really trivial in-index merge...
+fatal: Merge requires file-level merging
+Nope.
+Merging HEAD with 77976da35a11db4580b80ae27e8d65caf5208086
+Merging:
+15e2162 world
+77976da goodbye
+found 1 common ancestor(s):
+d122ed4 initial
+Auto-merging file.txt
+CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in file.txt
+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
+creating a new file.
+
+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.
+
+In more detail:
+
+[[resolving-a-merge]]
+Resolving a merge
+-----------------
+
+When a merge isn't resolved automatically, git leaves the index and
+the working tree in a special state that gives you all the
+information you need to help resolve the merge.
+
+Files with conflicts are marked specially in the index, so until you
+resolve the problem and update the index, git commit will fail:
+
+-------------------------------------------------
+$ git commit
+file.txt: needs merge
+-------------------------------------------------
+
+Also, git status will list those files as "unmerged".
+
+All of the changes that git was able to merge automatically are
+already added to the index file, so gitlink:git-diff[1] shows only
+the conflicts.  Also, it uses a somewhat unusual syntax:
+
+-------------------------------------------------
+$ git diff
+diff --cc file.txt
+index 802992c,2b60207..0000000
+--- a/file.txt
++++ b/file.txt
+@@@ -1,1 -1,1 +1,5 @@@
+++<<<<<<< HEAD:file.txt
+ +Hello world
+++=======
++ Goodbye
+++>>>>>>> 77976da35a11db4580b80ae27e8d65caf5208086:file.txt
+-------------------------------------------------
+
+Recall that the commit which will be commited 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.
+
+The diff above shows the differences between the working-tree version
+of file.txt and two previous version: one version from HEAD, and one
+from MERGE_HEAD.  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.  Thus after resolving the conflict in the
+obvious way, the diff will look like:
+
+-------------------------------------------------
+$ git diff
+diff --cc file.txt
+index 802992c,2b60207..0000000
+--- a/file.txt
++++ b/file.txt
+@@@ -1,1 -1,1 +1,1 @@@
+- Hello world
+ -Goodbye
+++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.
+
+The gitlink:git-log[1] command also provides special help for merges:
+
+-------------------------------------------------
+$ git log --merge
+-------------------------------------------------
+
+This will list all commits which exist only on HEAD or on MERGE_HEAD,
+and which touch an unmerged file.
+
+We can now add the resolved version to the index and commit:
+
+-------------------------------------------------
+$ git add file.txt
+$ git commit
+-------------------------------------------------
+
+Note that the commit message will already be filled in for you with
+some information about the merge.  Normally you can just use this
+default message unchanged, but you may add additional commentary of
+your own if desired.
+
+[[undoing-a-merge]]
+undoing a merge
+---------------
+
+If you get stuck and decide to just give up and throw the whole mess
+away, you can always return to the pre-merge state with
+
+-------------------------------------------------
+$ git reset --hard HEAD
+-------------------------------------------------
+
+Or, if you've already commited the merge that you want to throw away,
+
+-------------------------------------------------
+$ git reset --hard HEAD^
+-------------------------------------------------
+
+However, this last command can be dangerous in some cases--never
+throw away a commit you have already committed if that commit may
+itself have been merged into another branch, as doing so may confuse
+further merges.
+
+Fast-forward merges
+-------------------
+
+There is one special case not mentioned above, which is treated
+differently.  Normally, a merge results in a merge commit, with two
+parents, one pointing at each of the two lines of development that
+were merged.
+
+However, if one of the two lines of development is completely
+contained within the other--so every commit present in the one is
+already contained in the other--then git just performs a
+<<fast-forwards,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.
+
+Ensuring good performance
+-------------------------
+
+On large repositories, git depends on compression to keep the history
+information from taking up to much space on disk or in memory.
+
+This compression is not performed automatically.  Therefore you
+should occasionally run
+
+-------------------------------------------------
+$ git gc
+-------------------------------------------------
+
+to recompress the archive and to prune any commits which are no
+longer referred to anywhere.  This can be very time-consuming, and
+you should not modify the repository while it is working, so you
+should run it while you are not working.
+
+Sharing development with others
+-------------------------------
+
+[[getting-updates-with-git-pull]]
+Getting updates with git pull
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+After you clone a repository and make a few changes of your own, you
+may wish to check the original repository for updates and merge them
+into your own work.
+
+We have already seen <<Updating-a-repository-with-git-fetch,how to
+keep remote tracking branches up to date>> with gitlink:git-fetch[1],
+and how to merge two branches.  So you can merge in changes from the
+original repository's master branch with:
+
+-------------------------------------------------
+$ git fetch
+$ git merge origin/master
+-------------------------------------------------
+
+However, the gitlink:git-pull[1] command provides a way to do this in
+one step:
+
+-------------------------------------------------
+$ git pull origin master
+-------------------------------------------------
+
+In fact, "origin" is normally the default repository to pull from,
+and the default branch is normally the HEAD of the remote repository,
+so often you can accomplish the above with just
+
+-------------------------------------------------
+$ git pull
+-------------------------------------------------
+
+See the descriptions of the branch.<name>.remote and
+branch.<name>.merge options in gitlink:git-repo-config[1] to learn
+how to control these defaults depending on the current branch.
+
+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.
+
+(But note that no such commit will be created in the case of a
+<<fast-forwards,fast forward>>; instead, your branch will just be
+updated to point to the latest commit from the upstream branch).
+
+Submitting patches to a project
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+If you just have a few changes, the simplest way to submit them may
+just be to send them as patches in email:
+
+First, use gitlink:git-format-patches[1]; for example:
+
+-------------------------------------------------
+$ git format-patches 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.
+
+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
+use the gitlink:git-send-email[1] script to automate the process.
+Consult the mailing list for your project first to determine how they
+prefer such patches be handled.
+
+Importing patches to a project
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+Git also provides a tool called gitlink:git-am[1] (am stands for
+"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
+
+-------------------------------------------------
+$ git am 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>>".  Once the index is updated
+with the results of the conflict resolution, instead of creating a
+new commit, just run
+
+-------------------------------------------------
+$ git am --resolved
+-------------------------------------------------
+
+and git will create the commit for you and continue applying the
+remaining patches from the mailbox.
+
+The final result will be a series of commits, one for each patch in
+the original mailbox, with authorship and commit log message each
+taken from the message containing each patch.
+
+[[setting-up-a-public-repository]]
+Setting up a public repository
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+Another way to submit changes to a project is to simply tell the
+maintainer of that project to pull from your repository, exactly as
+you did in the section "<<getting-updates-with-git-pull, Getting
+updates with git pull>>".
+
+If you and maintainer both have accounts on the same machine, then
+then you can just pull changes from each other's repositories
+directly; note that all of the command (gitlink:git-clone[1],
+git-fetch[1], git-pull[1], etc.) which accept a URL as an argument
+will also accept a local file patch; so, for example, you can
+use
+
+-------------------------------------------------
+$ git clone /path/to/repository
+$ git pull /path/to/other/repository
+-------------------------------------------------
+
+If this sort of setup is inconvenient or impossible, another (more
+common) option is to set up a public repository on a public server.
+This also 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 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
+like this:
+
+                        you push
+  your personal repo ------------------> your public repo
+  	^                                     |
+	|                                     |
+	| you pull                            | they pull
+	|                                     |
+	|                                     |
+        |               they push             V
+  their public repo <------------------- their repo
+
+Now, assume your personal repository is in the directory ~/proj.  We
+first create a new clone of the repository:
+
+-------------------------------------------------
+$ git clone --bare proj-clone.git
+-------------------------------------------------
+
+The resulting directory proj-clone.git will contains a "bare" git
+repository--it is just the contents of the ".git" directory, without
+a checked-out copy of a working directory.
+
+Next, copy proj-clone.git to the server where you plan to host the
+public repository.  You can use scp, rsync, or whatever is most
+convenient.
+
+If somebody else maintains the public server, they may already have
+set up a git service for you, and you may skip to the section
+"<<pushing-changes-to-a-public-repository,Pushing changes to a public
+repository>>", below.
+
+Otherwise, the following sections explain how to export your newly
+created public repository:
+
+[[exporting-via-http]]
+Exporting a git repository via http
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+The git protocol gives better performance and reliability, but on a
+host with a web server set up, http exports may be simpler to set up.
+
+All you need to do is place the newly created bare git repository in
+a directory that is exported by the web server, and make some
+adjustments to give web clients some extra information they need:
+
+-------------------------------------------------
+$ mv proj.git /home/you/public_html/proj.git
+$ cd proj.git
+$ git update-server-info
+$ chmod a+x hooks/post-update
+-------------------------------------------------
+
+(For an explanation of the last two lines, see
+gitlink:git-update-server-info[1], and the documentation
+link:hooks.txt[Hooks used by git].)
+
+Advertise the url of proj.git.  Anybody else should then be able to
+clone or pull from that url, for example with a commandline like:
+
+-------------------------------------------------
+$ git clone http://yourserver.com/~you/proj.git
+-------------------------------------------------
+
+(See also
+link:howto/setup-git-server-over-http.txt[setup-git-server-over-http]
+for a slightly more sophisticated setup using WebDAV which also
+allows pushing over http.)
+
+[[exporting-via-git]]
+Exporting a git repository via the git protocol
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+This is the preferred method.
+
+For now, we refer you to the gitlink:git-daemon[1] man page for
+instructions.  (See especially the examples section.)
+
+[[pushing-changes-to-a-public-repository]]
+Pushing changes to a public repository
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+Note that the two techniques outline above (exporting via
+<<exporting-via-http,http>> or <<exporting-via-git,git>>) allow other
+maintainers to fetch your latest changes, but they do not allow write
+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 gitlink:git-push[1] and ssh; to
+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
+-------------------------------------------------
+
+or just
+
+-------------------------------------------------
+$ git push ssh://yourserver.com/~you/proj.git master
+-------------------------------------------------
+
+As with git-fetch, git-push will complain if this does not result in
+a <<fast-forwards,fast forward>>.  Normally this is a sign of
+something wrong.  However, if you are sure you know what you're
+doing, you may force git-push to perform the update anyway by
+proceeding the branch name by a plus sign:
+
+-------------------------------------------------
+$ git push ssh://yourserver.com/~you/proj.git +master
+-------------------------------------------------
+
+As with git-fetch, you may also set up configuration options to
+save typing; so, for example, after
+
+-------------------------------------------------
+$ cat >.git/config <<EOF
+[remote "public-repo"]
+	url = ssh://yourserver.com/~you/proj.git
+EOF
+-------------------------------------------------
+
+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 gitlink:git-repo-config[1] for
+details.
+
+Setting up a shared repository
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+Another way to collaborate is by using a model similar to that
+commonly used in CVS, where several developers with special rights
+all push to and pull from a single shared repository.  See
+link:cvs-migration.txt[git for CVS users] for instructions on how to
+set this up.
+
+Fixing mistakes
+---------------
+
+If you've messed up the working tree, but haven't yet committed your
+mistake, you can return the entire working tree to the last committed
+state with
+
+-------------------------------------------------
+$ git reset --hard HEAD
+-------------------------------------------------
+
+If you make a commit that you later wish you hadn't, there are two
+fundamentally different ways to fix the problem:
+
+	1. You can create a new commit that undoes whatever was done
+	by the previous commit.  This is the correct thing if your
+	mistake has already been made public.
+
+	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
+	change, and cannot correctly perform repeated merges from
+	a branch that has had its history changed.
+
+Fixing a mistake with a new commit
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+Creating a new commit that reverts an earlier change is very easy;
+just pass the gitlink:git-revert[1] command a reference to the bad
+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
+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:
+
+-------------------------------------------------
+$ git revert HEAD^
+-------------------------------------------------
+
+In this case git will attempt to undo the old change while leaving
+intact any changes made since then.  If more recent changes overlap
+with the changes to be reverted, then you will be asked to fix
+conflicts manually, just as in the case of <<resolving-a-merge,
+resolving a merge>>.
+
+Fixing a mistake by editing history
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+If the problematic commit is the most recent commit, and you have not
+yet made that commit public, then you may just
+<<undoing-a-merge,destroy it using git-reset>>.
+
+Alternatively, you
+can edit the working directory and update the index to fix your
+mistake, just as if you were going to <<how-to-make-a-commit,create a
+new commit>>, then run
+
+-------------------------------------------------
+$ git commit --amend
+-------------------------------------------------
+
+which will replace the old commit by a new commit incorporating your
+changes, giving you a chance to edit the old commit message first.
+
+Again, you should never do this to a commit that may already have
+been merged into another branch; use gitlink:git-revert[1] instead in
+that case.
+
+It is also possible to edit commits further back in the history, but
+this is an advanced topic to be left for
+<<cleaning-up-history,another chapter>>.
+
+Checking out an old version of a file
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+In the process of undoing a previous bad change, you may find it
+useful to check out an older version of a particular file using
+gitlink:git-checkout[1].  We've used git checkout before to switch
+branches, but it has quite different behavior if it is given a path
+name: the command
+
+-------------------------------------------------
+$ git checkout HEAD^ path/to/file
+-------------------------------------------------
+
+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
+modifying the working directory, you can do that with
+gitlink:git-show[1]:
+
+-------------------------------------------------
+$ git show HEAD^ path/to/file
+-------------------------------------------------
+
+which will display the given version of the file.
+
+Working with other version control systems
+==========================================
+
+TODO: CVS, Subversion, ?
+
+[[cleaning-up-history]]
+Cleaning up history: rebasing, cherry-picking, and patch series
+===============================================================
+
+TODO: rebase, cherry-pick, pointers to other tools (like stgit)
+
+Git internals
+=============
+
+Architectural overview
+----------------------
+
+TODO: Sources, README, core-tutorial, tutorial-2.txt, technical/
+
+Glossary of git terms
+=====================
+
+include::glossary.txt[]
+
+Todo list for this manual
+=========================
+
+Scan Documentation/ for other stuff left out; in particular:
+	howto's
+	README
+	some of technical/?
+	hooks
+	etc.
+
+Scan email archives for other stuff left out
+
+Scan man pages to see if any assume more background than this manual
+provides.
+
+Mention of gitweb.
+
+Update git fetch discussion to use "git remote" setup.  That will
+make things simpler.  Maybe wait till git remote is done.
+
+Can also simplify beginning by suggesting disconnected head instead
+of temporary branch creation.
+
+Explain how to refer to file stages in the "how to resolve a merge"
+section: diff -1, -2, -3; :1:/path notation.
+
+Include cross-references to the glossary, where appropriate.
+