Initial work on making extensions work in incognito mode.

Initial work on making extensions work in incognito mode.

This merely adds a way to enable content scripts and browser actions in incognito windows. They still don't work properly because none of the APIs work with incognito tabs.

The way to enable an extension is to add an "incognito" bit in the user prefs file. My plan is to add UI for this later.

BUG=32365
Committed: http://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=38852

[Erik does not do reviews, 2010-02-09 19:28:35]

a few general comments:
- it seems like an extension moving from non-incognito to this should be treated
as a privilege escalation
- perhaps this should be an "experimental" property somehow so we don't have to
worry about these showing up in the gallery, etc. while we're still working on
it.  Not sure exactly how this would work.

http://codereview.chromium.org/567037/diff/2001/3008
File chrome/browser/extensions/incognito_noscript_apitest.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/567037/diff/2001/3008#newcode27
chrome/browser/extensions/incognito_noscript_apitest.cc:27:
ui_test_utils::OpenURLOffTheRecord(browser()->profile(),
is this synchronous?  is the next method guaranteed to succeed?

http://codereview.chromium.org/567037/diff/2001/3008#newcode57
chrome/browser/extensions/incognito_noscript_apitest.cc:57:
GURL("http://www.foo.com:1337/files/extensions/test_file.html"));
in general we prefer example.com for sample URLs when possible

http://codereview.chromium.org/567037/diff/2001/3009
File chrome/browser/extensions/user_script_master.cc (left):

http://codereview.chromium.org/567037/diff/2001/3009#oldcode369
chrome/browser/extensions/user_script_master.cc:369: // See:
http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=11547.
there's a comment in this bug claiming that it's still broken for mac

http://codereview.chromium.org/567037/diff/2001/3011
File chrome/browser/gtk/browser_actions_toolbar_gtk.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/567037/diff/2001/3011#newcode372
chrome/browser/gtk/browser_actions_toolbar_gtk.cc:372: bool
BrowserActionsToolbarGtk::ShouldDisplayBrowserAction(Extension* extension) {
80 cols

http://codereview.chromium.org/567037/diff/2001/3013
File chrome/browser/profile.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/567037/diff/2001/3013#newcode258
chrome/browser/profile.cc:258: return NULL;
why not this one as well?  seems like there should at least be a TODO and a bug
here

http://codereview.chromium.org/567037/diff/2001/3013#newcode391
chrome/browser/profile.cc:391: return
GetOriginalProfile()->GetRequestContextForExtensions();
is this debugging code? or did you indent to remove the old code?

http://codereview.chromium.org/567037/diff/2001/3025
File chrome/renderer/user_script_slave.h (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/567037/diff/2001/3025#newcode34
chrome/renderer/user_script_slave.h:34: // Update the parsed scripts from shared
memory.
update comment to explain the argument.  it took me a few times reading the name
to be sure I got the sense of it.

[Matt Perry, 2010-02-10 22:44:54]

New snapshot up.

Re your general comments, I agree. Right now, this is a somewhat hidden feature,
since you can only enable it by manually editing your prefs file. I plan on
fleshing it out more as I go along, including requiring an incognito permission
in the extension itself.

http://codereview.chromium.org/567037/diff/2001/3008
File chrome/browser/extensions/incognito_noscript_apitest.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/567037/diff/2001/3008#newcode27
chrome/browser/extensions/incognito_noscript_apitest.cc:27:
ui_test_utils::OpenURLOffTheRecord(browser()->profile(),
On 2010/02/09 19:28:35, Erik Kay wrote:
> is this synchronous?  is the next method guaranteed to succeed?

Yes, it waits for navigations to complete.

http://codereview.chromium.org/567037/diff/2001/3008#newcode57
chrome/browser/extensions/incognito_noscript_apitest.cc:57:
GURL("http://www.foo.com:1337/files/extensions/test_file.html"));
On 2010/02/09 19:28:35, Erik Kay wrote:
> in general we prefer http://example.com for sample URLs when possible

Done.

http://codereview.chromium.org/567037/diff/2001/3009
File chrome/browser/extensions/user_script_master.cc (left):

http://codereview.chromium.org/567037/diff/2001/3009#oldcode369
chrome/browser/extensions/user_script_master.cc:369: // See:
http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=11547.
On 2010/02/09 19:28:35, Erik Kay wrote:
> there's a comment in this bug claiming that it's still broken for mac

oops. I reopened the bug.

http://codereview.chromium.org/567037/diff/2001/3011
File chrome/browser/gtk/browser_actions_toolbar_gtk.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/567037/diff/2001/3011#newcode372
chrome/browser/gtk/browser_actions_toolbar_gtk.cc:372: bool
BrowserActionsToolbarGtk::ShouldDisplayBrowserAction(Extension* extension) {
On 2010/02/09 19:28:35, Erik Kay wrote:
> 80 cols

Done.

http://codereview.chromium.org/567037/diff/2001/3013
File chrome/browser/profile.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/567037/diff/2001/3013#newcode258
chrome/browser/profile.cc:258: return NULL;
On 2010/02/09 19:28:35, Erik Kay wrote:
> why not this one as well?  seems like there should at least be a TODO and a
bug
> here

I'm not sure what this would do. I've added a TODO.

http://codereview.chromium.org/567037/diff/2001/3013#newcode391
chrome/browser/profile.cc:391: return
GetOriginalProfile()->GetRequestContextForExtensions();
On 2010/02/09 19:28:35, Erik Kay wrote:
> is this debugging code? or did you indent to remove the old code?

Good catch. I've removed the OTR-for-extensions context.

http://codereview.chromium.org/567037/diff/2001/3025
File chrome/renderer/user_script_slave.h (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/567037/diff/2001/3025#newcode34
chrome/renderer/user_script_slave.h:34: // Update the parsed scripts from shared
memory.
On 2010/02/09 19:28:35, Erik Kay wrote:
> update comment to explain the argument.  it took me a few times reading the
name
> to be sure I got the sense of it.

Done.

[Erik does not do reviews, 2010-02-11 01:35:40]

LGTM