Merge pull request #57 from randomecho/pronoun-wash

Remove pronoun I from voice for lack of lone addressor

Author: Matthew McCullough

basic/index.html

@@ -140,8 +140,8 @@ <h2>
   <div class="block">
     <p>As you saw in the <code>git add</code> section, in order to see what the
     status of your staging area is compared to the code in your working
-    directory, you can run the <code>git status</code> command. I demonstrated
-    using it with the <code>-s</code> option, which gives you short output.
+    directory, you can run the <code>git status</code> command. Using the
+    <code>-s</code> option will give you short output.
     Without that flag, the <code>git status</code> command will give you more
     context and hints.  Here is the same status output with and without the
     <code>-s</code>.  The short output looks like this:
@@ -572,7 +572,7 @@ <h4>
     <p>Notice how if you don't stage any changes and then run
     <code>git commit</code>, Git will simply give you the output of the
     <code>git status</code> command, reminding you that nothing is staged.
-    I've highlighted the important part of that message, saying that nothing
+    The important part of that message has been highlighted, saying that nothing
     is added to be committed.   If you use <code>-a</code>, it will add and
     commit everything at once.
     </p>
@@ -605,31 +605,29 @@ <h2>
 
   <div class="block">
     <p><code>git reset</code> is probably the most confusing command written
-    by humans.  I've been using Git for years, even wrote a book on it and I
-    still get confused by what it is going to do at times.  So, I'll just
-    tell you the three specific invocations of it that are generally
-    helpful and ask you to blindly use it as I do - because it can be
-    very useful.
+    by humans, but it can be very useful when you get the hang of it.
+    There are three specific invocations of it that are generally
+    helpful.
     </p>
 
     <h4>
       git reset HEAD
       <small>undo the last commit and unstage the files</small>
     </h4>
 
-    <p>In the first case, we can use it to unstage something that you have
+    <p>First, you can use it to unstage something that has been
     accidentally staged.  Let's say that you have modified two files and want
     to record them into two different commits.  You should stage and commit
     one, then stage and commit the other.  If you accidentally stage both of
     them, how do you <i>un-</i>stage one?  You do it with
-    <code>git reset HEAD -- file</code>.  Technically here you don't have to
+    <code>git reset HEAD -- file</code>.  Technically you don't have to
     add the <code>--</code> - it is used to tell Git when you have stopped
     listing options and are now listing file paths, but it's probably good to
     get into the habit of using it to separate options from paths even if you
     don't need to.
     </p>
 
-    <p>So, let's see what it looks like to unstage something.  Here we have
+    <p>Let's see what it looks like to unstage something.  Here we have
     two files that have been modified since our last commit.  We will stage
     both, then unstage one of them.</p>
 
@@ -782,7 +780,7 @@ <h2>
 
     <p><code>git rm</code> will remove entries from the staging area.
     This is a bit different from <code>git reset HEAD</code> which "unstages"
-    files.  By "unstage" I mean it reverts the staging area to what was
+    files.  To "unstage" means it reverts the staging area to what was
     there before we started modifying things.  <code>git rm</code> on the
     other hand just kicks the file off the stage entirely, so that it's not
     included in the next commit snapshot, thereby effectively deleting it.</p>
@@ -810,10 +808,10 @@ <h4>
     </p>
 
     <p class="aside">
-    I personally don't use this command that much in it's normal form - to
-    delete files.  It's often easier to just remove the files off your disk and
-    then run a <code>git commit -a</code>, which will automatically remove them
-    from your index, too.</p>
+    In its normal form the command is used to delete files.
+    But it's often easier to just remove the files off your disk and
+    then run <code>git commit -a</code>, which will also automatically remove
+    them from your index.</p>
 
     <p class="nutshell">
     <strong>In a nutshell</strong>,

branching/index.html

@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ <h2>
     Branching and Merging
   </h2>
   <div class="block">
-    <p>Branching in Git is one of my favorite features.  If you have used other
+    <p>Branching in Git is one of its many great features.  If you have used other
     version control systems, it's probably helpful to forget most of what you
     think about branches - in fact, it may be more helpful to think of them
     practically as <i>contexts</i> since that is how you will most often be
@@ -319,7 +319,7 @@ <h4>
 </pre>
 
     <p>So first we're going to create a new branch named 'change_class' and
-    switch to it so your class renaming changes are isolated. I'm going to
+    switch to it so your class renaming changes are isolated. We're going to
     change each instance of 'HelloWorld' to 'HiWorld'.</p>
 
 <pre>
@@ -333,9 +333,9 @@ <h4>
  1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
 </pre>
 
-    <p>So now I've committed the class renaming changes to the 'change_class'
-      branch.  If I now switch back to the 'master' branch my class name will
-      revert to what it was before I switched branches. Here I can change
+    <p>So now we've committed the class renaming changes to the 'change_class'
+      branch.  To switch back to the 'master' branch the class name will
+      revert to what it was before we switched branches. Here we can change
       something different (in this case the printed output) and at the same
       time rename the file from <code>hello.rb</code> to <code>ruby.rb</code>.
       </p>
@@ -365,10 +365,10 @@ <h4>
  rename hello.rb => ruby.rb (65%)
 </pre>
 
-    <p>Now those changes are recorded in my 'master' branch.  Notice that the
-      class name is back to 'HelloWorld', not 'HiWorld'.  Now I want to
-      incorporate the 'HiWorld' change so I can just merge in my 'change_class'
-      branch.  However, I've changed the name of the file since I branched,
+    <p>Now those changes are recorded in the 'master' branch.  Notice that the
+      class name is back to 'HelloWorld', not 'HiWorld'.  To incorporate
+      the 'HiWorld' change we can just merge in the 'change_class'
+      branch.  However, the name of the file has changed since we branched,
       what will Git do?</p>
 
 <pre>
@@ -391,7 +391,7 @@ <h4>
 HiWorld.hello
 </pre>
 
-    <p>Well, it will just figure it out. Notice that I had no merge conflicts
+    <p>Well, it will just figure it out. Notice that there are no merge conflicts
     and the file that had been renamed now has the 'HiWorld' class name change
     that was done in the other branch. Pretty cool.</p>
 
@@ -474,9 +474,9 @@ <h4>
 
     <p>A cool tip in doing merge conflict resolution in Git is that if you
     run <code>git diff</code>, it will show you both sides of the conflict
-    and how you've resolved it as I've shown here. Now it's time to mark
+    and how you've resolved it as shown here. Now it's time to mark
     the file as resolved.  In Git we do that with <code>git add</code> -
-    to tell Git the file has been resolved, you have to stage it.</p>
+    to tell Git the file has been resolved you have to stage it.</p>
 
 <pre>
 <b>$ git status -s</b>
@@ -684,7 +684,7 @@ <h2>
 </pre>
 
     <p>This way, it's pretty easy to see that we have Haskell code included in
-      the branch (as I've highlighted). What is even cooler is that we can
+      the branch (highlighted in the output). What is even cooler is that we can
       easily tell Git that we only are interested in the commits that are
       reachable in one branch that are not reachable in another, in other words
       which commits are unique to a branch in comparison to another.
@@ -751,7 +751,7 @@ <h2>
     tag", which allows you to add a tag message to it, which is what you almost
     always want to do.  Running this without the <code>-a</code> works too, but
     it doesn't record when it was tagged, who tagged it, or let you add a tag
-    message. I would recommend always creating annotated tags.</p>
+    message. It's recommended you always create annotated tags.</p>
 
 <pre>
 <b>$ git tag -a v1.0 </b>

index.html

@@ -5,7 +5,7 @@
   <h2>Introduction to the Git Reference</h2>
   <div class="block">
     <p>
-    This is the Git reference site. This is meant to be a quick
+    This is the Git reference site. It is meant to be a quick
     reference for learning and remembering the most important and
     commonly used Git commands.  The commands are organized into
     sections of the type of operation you may be trying to do, and
@@ -28,7 +28,7 @@ <h2>Introduction to the Git Reference</h2>
   <h2>How to Think Like Git</h2>
   <div class="block">
     <p>
-    The first thing that is important to understand about Git is
+    The first important thing to understand about Git is
     that it thinks about version control very differently than
     Subversion or Perforce or whatever SCM you may be used to. It
     is often easier to learn Git by trying to forget your assumptions

inspect/index.html

@@ -57,8 +57,8 @@ <h4>
     you can use the <code>--author</code> option.  For example, let's say we're
     looking for the commits in the Git source code done by Linus.  We would
     type something like <code>git log --author=Linus</code>. The search is
-    case sensitive and also will search the email address.  I'll do the
-    example using the <code>-[number]</code> option, which will limit the
+    case sensitive and will also search the email address.  The following
+    example will use the <code>-[number]</code> option, which will limit the
     results to the last [number] commits.
     </p>
 
@@ -78,11 +78,11 @@ <h4>
 
     <p>
     If you want to specify a date range that you're interested in filtering your
-    commits down to, you can use a number of options - I use <code>--since</code>
-    and <code>--before</code>, but you can also use <code>--until</code> and
-    <code>--after</code>.  For example, if I wanted to see all the commits in
-    the Git project before 3 weeks ago but after April 18th, I could run this
-    (I'm also going to use <code>--no-merges</code> to remove merge commits):
+    commits down to, you can use a number of options such as <code>--since</code>
+    and <code>--before</code>, or you can also use <code>--until</code> and
+    <code>--after</code>.  For example, to see all the commits in
+    the Git project before three weeks ago but after April 18th, you could run this
+    (We're also going to use <code>--no-merges</code> to remove merge commits):
     </p>
 
 <pre>
@@ -105,9 +105,9 @@ <h4>
 
     <p>
       You may also want to look for commits with a certain phrase in the commit
-      message.  You can use <code>--grep</code> for that.  Let's say I knew there
+      message.  Use <code>--grep</code> for that.  Let's say there
       was a commit that dealt with using the P4EDITOR environment variable and
-      I wanted to remember what that change looked like - I could find the commit
+      you wanted to remember what that change looked like - you could find the commit
       with <code>--grep</code>.
     </p>
 
@@ -132,11 +132,11 @@ <h4>
     arguments.  If you want to use <code>--grep</code> and <code>--author</code>
     to see commits that were authored by someone AND have a specific message
     content, you have to add the <code>--all-match</code> option. In these
-    examples, I'm going to use the <code>--format</code> option, so we can see
+    examples we're going to use the <code>--format</code> option, so we can see
     who the author of each commit was.
     </p>
 
-    <p>If I look for the commit messages with 'p4 depo' in them, I get these
+    <p>If we look for the commit messages with 'p4 depo' in them, we get these
     three commits:</p>
 
 <pre>
@@ -146,8 +146,8 @@ <h4>
 1cd5738 Simon Hausmann Make incremental imports easier to use by storing the p4 d
 </pre>
 
-    <p>If I add a <code>--author=Hausmann</code> argument, instead of further
-    filtering it down to the one commit by Simon, it instead will show me all
+    <p>If we add a <code>--author=Hausmann</code> argument, instead of further
+    filtering it down to the one commit by Simon, it instead will show all
     commits by Simon OR commits with "p4 depo" in the message:</p>
 
 <pre>
@@ -167,7 +167,7 @@ <h4>
 ...
 </pre>
 
-    <p>However, if I add a <code>--all-match</code>, I get the results I'm
+    <p>However, adding <code>--all-match</code> will get the results you're
     looking for:</p>
 
 <pre>
@@ -417,7 +417,7 @@ <h2>
 
     <p>That's what we're looking for, but we don't want to have to figure out
     what commit the two branches diverged from every time. Luckily, Git has a
-    shortcut for this. If you run <code>git diff master...erlang</code> (with 
+    shortcut for this. If you run <code>git diff master...erlang</code> (with
 	three dots in between the branch names), Git will automatically figure out
     what the common commit (otherwise known as the "merge base") of the two
     commit is and do the diff off of that.</p>
@@ -438,7 +438,7 @@ <h2>
     the triple-dot syntax, because it will almost always give you what you want.
     </p>
 
-    <p>As a bit of an aside, you can also have git manually calculate the
+    <p>As a bit of an aside, you can also have Git manually calculate what the
     merge-base (first common ancestor commit) of any two commits would be with
     the <code>git merge-base</code> command:</p>
 
@@ -447,7 +447,7 @@ <h2>
 8d585ea6faf99facd39b55d6f6a3b3f481ad0d3d
 </pre>
 
-    <p>So, you can do the equivalent of <code>git diff master...erlang</code>
+    <p>You can do the equivalent of <code>git diff master...erlang</code>
     by running this:</p>
 
 <pre>
@@ -457,7 +457,7 @@ <h2>
  2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
 </pre>
 
-    <p>I would of course recommend using the easier syntax, though.</p>
+    <p>You may prefer using the easier syntax though.</p>
 
 
     <p class="nutshell">

remotes/index.html

@@ -100,7 +100,7 @@ <h4>
     adds <code>[url]</code> under a local remote named <code>[alias]</code>.</p>
 
     <p>For example, if we want to share our Hello World program with the world,
-    we can create a new repository on a server (I'll use GitHub as an example),
+    we can create a new repository on a server (Using GitHub as an example),
     which should give you a URL, in this case "[email protected]:schacon/hw.git".
     To add that to our project so we can push to it and fetch updates from it
     we would do this:</p>
@@ -117,8 +117,8 @@ <h4>
     has no special meaning but is widely used because <code>git init</code>
     sets it up by default, 'origin' is often used as a remote name because
     <code>git clone</code> sets it up by default as the cloned-from URL. In
-    this case I've decided to name my remote 'github', but I could have really
-    named it just about anything.
+    this case we'll name the remote 'github', but you could name it just
+    about anything.
     </p>
 
     <h4>
@@ -266,20 +266,20 @@ <h2>
     <p>The second command that will fetch down new data from a remote server is
     <code>git pull</code>.  This command will basically run a <code>git fetch</code>
     immediately followed by a <code>git merge</code> of the branch on that remote
-    that is tracked by whatever branch you are currently in.  I personally don't much
-    like this command - I prefer running <code>fetch</code> and <code>merge</code>
-    separately.  Less magic, less problems.  However, if you like this idea, you
-    can read about it in more detail in the
+    that is tracked by whatever branch you are currently in.  Running the
+    <code>fetch</code> and <code>merge</code> commands separately involves less magic
+    and less problems, but if you like the idea of <code>pull</code>, you can
+    read about it in more detail in the
     <a target="new" href="http://git-scm.com/docs/git-pull">official docs</a>.
     </p>
 
     <p>Assuming you have a remote all set up and you want to pull in updates, you
     would first run <code>git fetch [alias]</code> to tell Git to fetch down all the
     data it has that you do not, then you would run <code>git merge [alias]/[branch]</code>
     to merge into your current branch anything new you see on the server
-    (like if someone else has pushed in the meantime). So, if I were working on my
-    Hello World project with several other people and I wanted to bring in any changes
-    that had been pushed since I last connected, I would do something like this:</p>
+    (like if someone else has pushed in the meantime). So, if you were working on a
+    Hello World project with several other people and wanted to bring in any changes
+    that had been pushed since we last connected, we would do something like this:</p>
 
 <pre>
 <b>$ git fetch github</b>
@@ -296,17 +296,17 @@ <h2>
  * [new branch]      lisp       -> github/lisp
 </pre>
 
-    <p>I can see that since the last time I synchronized with this remote, five branches
+    <p>Here we can see that since we last synchronized with this remote, five branches
     have been added or updated.  The 'ada' and 'lisp' branches are new, where the
-    'master', 'c-langs' and 'java' branches have been updated.  In this case, my team
-    is pushing proposed updates to remote branches for review before they're merged
-    into 'master'.
+    'master', 'c-langs' and 'java' branches have been updated.  In our example case,
+    other developers are pushing proposed updates to remote branches for review before
+    they're merged into 'master'.
     </p>
 
     <p>You can see the mapping that Git makes.  The 'master' branch on the remote
-    repository becomes a branch named 'github/master' locally.  That way now I can
-    merge the 'master' branch on that remote into my local 'master' branch by running
-    <code>git merge github/master</code>.  Or, I can see what new commits are on that
+    repository becomes a branch named 'github/master' locally.  That way you can
+    merge the 'master' branch on that remote into the local 'master' branch by running
+    <code>git merge github/master</code>.  Or, you can see what new commits are on that
     branch by running <code>git log github/master ^master</code>.  If your remote
     is named 'origin' it would be <code>origin/master</code> instead.  Almost any
     command you would run using local branches you can use remote branches with too.
@@ -356,10 +356,10 @@ <h2>
 </pre>
 
     <p>Pretty easy. Now if someone clones that repository they will get exactly
-    what I have committed and all of its history.</p>
+    what we have committed and all of its history.</p>
 
-    <p>What if I have a topic branch like the 'erlang' branch we created earlier
-    and I just want to share that?  You can just push that branch instead.</p>
+    <p>What if you have a topic branch like the 'erlang' branch created earlier
+    and want to share just that?  You can just push that branch instead.</p>
 
 <pre>
 <b>$ git push github erlang</b>