>     You can commit a change offline (git commit).  Later on, when
>     you are online, you say `git pull' to get the current state of
>     the repository, and automatical merging happens (and the usual
>     warnings if there are conflicts).  Finally, you say `git push'
>     to synchronize your git repository with the global one.
> 
> Is this substantially different from CVS, or is it just relabeling?
> It sounds like `git push' is basically equivalent to CVS commit.

Correct.

> With CVS, until you commit your changes, new changes can be installed
> in the repository, and when you DO get around to committing your
> changes, you will have to merge them with whatever others have
> installed.  Once you commit, others trying to commit will have the
> burden of merging their changes with your already-committed changes.

This is absolutely the same as with CVS, of course, but: your changes
done offline, and which git can add with trivial merging, stay as
atomic units.  Unfortunately, ChangeLog file are likely to need manual
merging each time.  Many software projects which use git no longer
maintain such a ChangeLog file manually but create it afterwards
mechanically.

There's a wonderful tool called gitk which enables you to display git
changes in a very cleverly manner.  However, this is not a TTY
application but needs GTK.  I don't know whether there exists a gitk
equivalent which runs in a terminal.

Attached is an image which shows gitk in action.


   Werner