Merge branch 'po/fix-doc-merge-base-illustration'

Some AsciiDoc formatter mishandles a displayed illustration with
tabs in it.  Adjust a few of them in merge-base documentation to
work around them.

* po/fix-doc-merge-base-illustration:
  doc: fix the 'revert a faulty merge' ASCII art tab spacing
  doc: fix merge-base ASCII art tab spacing

Author: gitster

Documentation/git-merge-base.txt

@@ -80,8 +80,8 @@ which is reachable from both 'A' and 'B' through the parent relationship.
 
 For example, with this topology:
 
-		 o---o---o---B
-		/
+	         o---o---o---B
+	        /
 	---o---1---o---o---o---A
 
 the merge base between 'A' and 'B' is '1'.
@@ -116,11 +116,11 @@ the best common ancestor of all commits.
 When the history involves criss-cross merges, there can be more than one
 'best' common ancestor for two commits.  For example, with this topology:
 
-       ---1---o---A
-	   \ /
-	    X
-	   / \
-       ---2---o---o---B
+	---1---o---A
+	    \ /
+	     X
+	    / \
+	---2---o---o---B
 
 both '1' and '2' are merge-bases of A and B.  Neither one is better than
 the other (both are 'best' merge bases).  When the `--all` option is not given,
@@ -154,13 +154,13 @@ topic origin/master`, the history of remote-tracking branch
 `origin/master` may have been rewound and rebuilt, leading to a
 history of this shape:
 
-			 o---B1
-			/
+	                 o---B1
+	                /
 	---o---o---B2--o---o---o---B (origin/master)
-		\
-		 B3
-		  \
-		   Derived (topic)
+	        \
+	         B3
+	          \
+	           Derived (topic)
 
 where `origin/master` used to point at commits B3, B2, B1 and now it
 points at B, and your `topic` branch was started on top of it back

Documentation/howto/revert-a-faulty-merge.txt

@@ -30,7 +30,7 @@ The history immediately after the "revert of the merge" would look like
 this:
 
  ---o---o---o---M---x---x---W
-	       /
+               /
        ---A---B
 
 where A and B are on the side development that was not so good, M is the
@@ -47,7 +47,7 @@ After the developers of the side branch fix their mistakes, the history
 may look like this:
 
  ---o---o---o---M---x---x---W---x
-	       /
+               /
        ---A---B-------------------C---D
 
 where C and D are to fix what was broken in A and B, and you may already
@@ -81,7 +81,7 @@ In such a situation, you would want to first revert the previous revert,
 which would make the history look like this:
 
  ---o---o---o---M---x---x---W---x---Y
-	       /
+               /
        ---A---B-------------------C---D
 
 where Y is the revert of W.  Such a "revert of the revert" can be done
@@ -93,14 +93,14 @@ This history would (ignoring possible conflicts between what W and W..Y
 changed) be equivalent to not having W or Y at all in the history:
 
  ---o---o---o---M---x---x-------x----
-	       /
+               /
        ---A---B-------------------C---D
 
 and merging the side branch again will not have conflict arising from an
 earlier revert and revert of the revert.
 
  ---o---o---o---M---x---x-------x-------*
-	       /                       /
+               /                       /
        ---A---B-------------------C---D
 
 Of course the changes made in C and D still can conflict with what was
@@ -111,13 +111,13 @@ faulty A and B, and redone the changes on top of the updated mainline
 after the revert, the history would have looked like this:
 
  ---o---o---o---M---x---x---W---x---x
-	       /                 \
+               /                 \
        ---A---B                   A'--B'--C'
 
 If you reverted the revert in such a case as in the previous example:
 
  ---o---o---o---M---x---x---W---x---x---Y---*
-	       /                 \         /
+               /                 \         /
        ---A---B                   A'--B'--C'
 
 where Y is the revert of W, A' and B' are rerolled A and B, and there may
@@ -129,7 +129,7 @@ lot of overlapping changes that result in conflicts.  So do not do "revert
 of revert" blindly without thinking..
 
  ---o---o---o---M---x---x---W---x---x
-	       /                 \
+               /                 \
        ---A---B                   A'--B'--C'
 
 In the history with rebased side branch, W (and M) are behind the merge