[PATCH] Documentation/bisect: improve on (bad|new) and (good|bad)

[Christian Couder <christian.couder@gmail.com>]

The following part of the description:

git bisect (bad|new) [<rev>]
git bisect (good|old) [<rev>...]

may be a bit confusing, as a reader may wonder if instead it should be:

git bisect (bad|good) [<rev>]
git bisect (old|new) [<rev>...]

Of course the difference between "[<rev>]" and "[<rev>...]" should hint
that there is a good reason for the way it is.

But we can further clarify and complete the description by adding
"<term-new>" and "<term-old>" to the "bad|new" and "good|old"
alternatives.

Signed-off-by: Christian Couder <chriscool@tuxfamily.org>
---
 Documentation/git-bisect.txt | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/git-bisect.txt b/Documentation/git-bisect.txt
index 2bb9a577a2..bdd915a66b 100644
--- a/Documentation/git-bisect.txt
+++ b/Documentation/git-bisect.txt
@@ -18,8 +18,8 @@ on the subcommand:
 
  git bisect start [--term-{old,good}=<term> --term-{new,bad}=<term>]
 		  [--no-checkout] [<bad> [<good>...]] [--] [<paths>...]
- git bisect (bad|new) [<rev>]
- git bisect (good|old) [<rev>...]
+ git bisect (bad|new|<term-new>) [<rev>]
+ git bisect (good|old|<term-old>) [<rev>...]
  git bisect terms [--term-good | --term-bad]
  git bisect skip [(<rev>|<range>)...]
  git bisect reset [<commit>]
-- 
2.11.0.313.g11b7cc88e6.dirty