Don't send machine and user ID to Omaha anymore. Send a/r pings instead.

Don't send machine and user ID to Omaha anymore. Send a/r pings instead.

This avoids sending a unique ID in order to track active user counts.
Note that this CL doesn't remove the machine/user/Omaha ID/file from
the params object -- it just makes them unused/obsolete. Removal will
be done in a subsequent CL in an effort to make this CL smaller.

BUG=1439
TEST=unit tests, x86-generic, arm-generic, gmerged and inspected logs

[adlr, 2010-07-29 00:41:14]

http://codereview.chromium.org/2856070/diff/2001/3003
File omaha_request_action.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/2856070/diff/2001/3003#newcode193
omaha_request_action.cc:193: string request_post(FormatRequest(event_.get(),
params_, ping_active_days_,
one arg per line, i think, if they don't all fit on one line

http://codereview.chromium.org/2856070/diff/2001/3003#newcode289
omaha_request_action.cc:289: CHECK(nodeset) << "XPath missing NodeSet";
might be nice to fail gracefully here...

http://codereview.chromium.org/2856070/diff/2001/3003#newcode290
omaha_request_action.cc:290: CHECK_GE(nodeset->nodeNr, 1);
and here

http://codereview.chromium.org/2856070/diff/2001/3005
File omaha_request_action_unittest.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/2856070/diff/2001/3005#newcode37
omaha_request_action_unittest.cc:37: OmahaRequestParams g_default_test_params(
make this const and named kDefaultTestParams?

http://codereview.chromium.org/2856070/diff/2001/3005#newcode161
omaha_request_action_unittest.cc:161: OmahaRequestAction action(prefs ? prefs :
&local_prefs, params, NULL,
one arg per line

http://codereview.chromium.org/2856070/diff/2001/3005#newcode625
omaha_request_action_unittest.cc:625: (Time::Now() - TimeDelta::FromHours(5 * 24
+ 9)).ToInternalValue();
explain +9 (and +7 below)

[petkov, 2010-07-29 17:11:29]

http://codereview.chromium.org/2856070/diff/2001/3003
File omaha_request_action.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/2856070/diff/2001/3003#newcode193
omaha_request_action.cc:193: string request_post(FormatRequest(event_.get(),
params_, ping_active_days_,
On 2010/07/29 00:41:14, adlr wrote:
> one arg per line, i think, if they don't all fit on one line

Done.

http://codereview.chromium.org/2856070/diff/2001/3003#newcode289
omaha_request_action.cc:289: CHECK(nodeset) << "XPath missing NodeSet";
On 2010/07/29 00:41:14, adlr wrote:
> might be nice to fail gracefully here...

Done. Although we have the same checks down in the update check code too -- we
might want to relax those too.

http://codereview.chromium.org/2856070/diff/2001/3003#newcode290
omaha_request_action.cc:290: CHECK_GE(nodeset->nodeNr, 1);
On 2010/07/29 00:41:14, adlr wrote:
> and here

Done.

http://codereview.chromium.org/2856070/diff/2001/3005
File omaha_request_action_unittest.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/2856070/diff/2001/3005#newcode37
omaha_request_action_unittest.cc:37: OmahaRequestParams g_default_test_params(
On 2010/07/29 00:41:14, adlr wrote:
> make this const and named kDefaultTestParams?

Done. It's still not a POD type but thought it's OK for a test.

http://codereview.chromium.org/2856070/diff/2001/3005#newcode161
omaha_request_action_unittest.cc:161: OmahaRequestAction action(prefs ? prefs :
&local_prefs, params, NULL,
On 2010/07/29 00:41:14, adlr wrote:
> one arg per line

Done.

http://codereview.chromium.org/2856070/diff/2001/3005#newcode625
omaha_request_action_unittest.cc:625: (Time::Now() - TimeDelta::FromHours(5 * 24
+ 9)).ToInternalValue();
On 2010/07/29 00:41:14, adlr wrote:
> explain +9 (and +7 below)

Done.

[petkov, 2010-07-29 17:11:41]

PTAL

[adlr, 2010-07-29 19:20:02]

LGTM

[Carl Nygaard, 2010-07-29 21:02:53]

LGTM

All the days since logic looks correct to me.  Great tests too.

http://codereview.chromium.org/2856070/diff/8001/7005
File omaha_request_action.h (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/2856070/diff/8001/7005#newcode148
omaha_request_action.h:148: // Based on the perstitent preference store values,
calculates the
perstitent -> persistent

[petkov, 2010-07-29 21:09:47]

On 2010/07/29 21:02:53, Carl Nygaard wrote:
> LGTM

Thanks much for looking. I've added to typo fix to
http://codereview.chromium.org/2856070/show.

> 
> All the days since logic looks correct to me.  Great tests too.
> 
> http://codereview.chromium.org/2856070/diff/8001/7005
> File omaha_request_action.h (right):
> 
> http://codereview.chromium.org/2856070/diff/8001/7005#newcode148
> omaha_request_action.h:148: // Based on the perstitent preference store
values,
> calculates the
> perstitent -> persistent

[petkov, 2010-07-29 21:10:45]

On 2010/07/29 21:09:47, petkov wrote:
> On 2010/07/29 21:02:53, Carl Nygaard wrote:
> > LGTM
> 
> Thanks much for looking. I've added to typo fix to
> http://codereview.chromium.org/2856070/show.

I meant: http://codereview.chromium.org/2808082/show.

> 
> > 
> > All the days since logic looks correct to me.  Great tests too.
> > 
> > http://codereview.chromium.org/2856070/diff/8001/7005
> > File omaha_request_action.h (right):
> > 
> > http://codereview.chromium.org/2856070/diff/8001/7005#newcode148
> > omaha_request_action.h:148: // Based on the perstitent preference store
> values,
> > calculates the
> > perstitent -> persistent