Code review comment for lp:~spiv/bzr/per-file-merge-hook-491711

On Fri, 2009-12-18 at 17:09 +0000, Aaron Bentley wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Robert Collins wrote:
> > On Fri, 2009-12-18 at 08:08 +0000, Andrew Bennetts wrote:
> >> * it is invoked for all changes where one side has changed the
> >> content, and the other side has changed the content or deleted the fil
> >
> > Why not 'all changes' ? I don't see why we should prevent hooks merging
> > even one-side changes in a more sophisticated manner.
>
> That would require us to pay attention to THIS-only changes, and that
> would be a performance regression.

So there is a middle ground, where OTHER-only changes are examined.
There are a number of useful things one can do where OTHER-only changes
are examined (such as better merges of NEWS items by accounting for
changes after a release) which the current definition won't help with. I
see that checking for THIS-only changes would have an impact, and while
it might be nice, I don't see a need to do it at this point.

-Rob