versioned file api audit

[Aaron Bentley]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Robert Collins wrote:
>>>  plan_merge (perhaps keep this)
>> This is closely related to weave_merge, and so probably should be
>> kept.  Maybe it should be a private method and called by rather than
>> passed to weave_merge.
>>
>> You could say perhaps this will not vary with VF implementation, and
>> the vf should instead just give annotation data to something else.
> 
> Thats what I'm mulling over :). It's neither hard or easy to keep it; I
> haven't done a lot with the text merging stuff, most of my hacking has
> been lower or higher in the stack. So moar input please!

I don't think that the weave plan_merge code is used anywhere.
WeaveMerge calls Tree.plan_file_merge, which uses generic code to plan
the merge.

It's worth mentioning that annotations are no longer used for merge
planning, because this approach was too slow on packs.  Instead of
determining which revision introduced the line, we determine whether the
line was present in any common ancestor.

Aaron
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFH3xwl0F+nu1YWqI0RAsLcAJ9YFRraSx0rRi7nzwjy15KmeyL38wCeJoNz
nk20j9bLQlFaMoLoiGIgL98=
=ylmV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----