On Sat, Jul 18, 2015 at 10:10 PM, Michael Haggerty <mhagger@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Sometimes linked working trees were called "linked working > directories" or "linked worktrees". Always refer to them as "linked > working trees" for consistency. > > Signed-off-by: Michael Haggerty <mhagger@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > diff --git a/Documentation/git-worktree.txt b/Documentation/git-worktree.txt > index da71f50..c8dd0e5 100644 > --- a/Documentation/git-worktree.txt > +++ b/Documentation/git-worktree.txt > @@ -141,7 +141,7 @@ demands that you fix something immediately. You might typically use > linkgit:git-stash[1] to store your changes away temporarily, however, your > worktree is in such a state of disarray (with new, moved, and removed files, Was your intention to replace all instances of "worktree" with "working tree" or just some? If only some, what is the criteria by which you decide? I ask because several instances of "worktree" (such as the one above) remain even after this patch. > and other bits and pieces strewn around) that you don't want to risk > -disturbing any of it. Instead, you create a temporary linked worktree to > +disturbing any of it. Instead, you create a temporary linked working tree to > make the emergency fix, remove it when done, and then resume your earlier > refactoring session. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html