Adds ContentShellTest.apk and very simple test.

content/shell/android/javatests/src/org/chromium/content_shell/ContentShellTestBase.java

+// Copyright (c) 2012 The Chromium Authors. All rights reserved.
+// Use of this source code is governed by a BSD-style license that can be
+// found in the LICENSE file.
+
+package org.chromium.content_shell;
+
+import android.app.Activity;
+import android.content.ComponentName;
+import android.content.Intent;
+import android.net.Uri;
+import android.test.ActivityInstrumentationTestCase2;
+
+/**
+ * Base test class for all ContentShell based tests.
+ */
+public class ContentShellTestBase<T extends Activity> extends ActivityInstrumentationTestCase2<T> {

[Ted C, 2012/07/11 22:28:28]

why do we need to templatize this base activity?  Won't it always be a
ContentShellActivity?

[cjhopman, 2012/07/12 18:13:08]

Done. I don't know why this was templatized, but I could find no need for it.

+
+    public ContentShellTestBase(Class<T> activityClass) {
+        super(activityClass);
+    }
+
+    /**
+     * Starts the ContentShell activity and loads the given URL.
+     */
+    protected Activity launchContentShellWithUrl(String url) {

[Ted C, 2012/07/11 22:28:28]

Might as well just return ContentShellActivity since it's hardcoded below.

If there is some reason for allowing a template, should this return T?  Also
should you be specifying the class below as activityClass as set in the
constructor?

I still vote for removing the templating from this at all.

[cjhopman, 2012/07/12 18:13:08]

Done.

+        Intent intent = new Intent(Intent.ACTION_MAIN);
+        intent.addCategory(Intent.CATEGORY_LAUNCHER);
+        intent.addFlags(Intent.FLAG_ACTIVITY_NEW_TASK);
+        intent.setData(Uri.parse(url));
+        intent.setComponent(new ComponentName(getInstrumentation().getTargetContext(),
+                org.chromium.content_shell.ContentShellActivity.class));
+        return getInstrumentation().startActivitySync(intent);
+    }
+
+}