Re: [PATCH] git-push.txt: clean up force-with-lease wording

> The help text for the --force-with-lease option to git-push
> does not parse cleanly.  Clean up the wording and syntax to
> be more sensible.  Also remove redundant information in the
> "--force-with-lease alone" description.
>
> Signed-off-by: Phil Hord <hordp@cisco.com>
> ---

>  Documentation/git-push.txt | 14 ++++++--------
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/git-push.txt b/Documentation/git-push.txt
> index 5171086..863c30c 100644
> --- a/Documentation/git-push.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/git-push.txt
> @@ -157,9 +157,8 @@ already exists on the remote side.
>  	Usually, "git push" refuses to update a remote ref that is
>  	not an ancestor of the local ref used to overwrite it.
>  +
> -This option bypasses the check, but instead requires that the
> -current value of the ref to be the expected value.  "git push"
> -fails otherwise.
> +This option overrides this restriction if the current value of the
> +remote ref is the expected value.  "git push" fails otherwise.
>  +
>  Imagine that you have to rebase what you have already published.
>  You will have to bypass the "must fast-forward" rule in order to
> @@ -171,15 +170,14 @@ commit, and blindly pushing with `--force` will lose her work.
>  This option allows you to say that you expect the history you are
>  updating is what you rebased and want to replace. If the remote ref
>  still points at the commit you specified, you can be sure that no
> -other people did anything to the ref (it is like taking a "lease" on
> -the ref without explicitly locking it, and you update the ref while
> -making sure that your earlier "lease" is still valid).
> +other people did anything to the ref. It is like taking a "lease" on
> +the ref without explicitly locking it, and the remote ref is updated
> +only if the "lease" is still valid.
>  +
>  `--force-with-lease` alone, without specifying the details, will protect
>  all remote refs that are going to be updated by requiring their
>  current value to be the same as the remote-tracking branch we have
> -for them, unless specified with a `--force-with-lease=<refname>:<expect>`
> -option that explicitly states what the expected value is.
> +for them.
>  +
>  `--force-with-lease=<refname>`, without specifying the expected value, will
>  protect the named ref (alone), if it is going to be updated, by