1 files changed, 1 insertions, 1 deletions

diff --git a/doc/forum/Proper_usage_of_git_annex_proxy_to_mimc_undo_--depth.mdwn b/doc/forum/Proper_usage_of_git_annex_proxy_to_mimc_undo_--depth.mdwn
index fd2927c5d..1112932be 100644
--- a/doc/forum/Proper_usage_of_git_annex_proxy_to_mimc_undo_--depth.mdwn
+++ b/doc/forum/Proper_usage_of_git_annex_proxy_to_mimc_undo_--depth.mdwn
@@ -8,7 +8,7 @@ I saw this in the `git revert` docs and thought that `git annex proxy -- git che
 
 What I've found is that your suggestion of `git revert` is nice because it wouldn't create a conflict, as `git checkout` does. 
 
-So annex, thorough as it is, creates a `$filename.variant-local.$ext` file after the auto conflict resolution to preserve the original. `git revert` is neater, history wise, because there is no conflict because git knows exactly what's changing and from whence it came, rather than just some new file content showing up from who knows where with `git checkout`. 
+So annex, thorough as it is, creates a `$filename.variant-local.$ext` file after the auto conflict resolution to preserve the original. `git revert` is neater, history wise, because there is no conflict as git knows exactly what's changing and from whence it came, rather than just some new file content showing up from who knows where with `git checkout`. 
 
 The issue it seems is that git revert works on a commit basis, while git checkout can operate on files. If I'm correct in this it would be good to know if annex uses one commit per file, for sure, every time? If this is the case, there would be no problem using the better in most every other way `git revert`.