Update chrome://extensions for supervised users

Update chrome://extensions for supervised users

This includes:
- new types of controlled-setting-indicator for children/supervised users
- corresponding new "controlled-by" strings
- passing the strings through the developerPrivate API, and removing the now-unnecessary installedByCustodian field

BUG=397951
Committed: https://crrev.com/5c654f86279e4abef018d89c8d94611fe8edacc0
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#330928}

[Marc Treib, 2015-05-19 13:21:50]

treib@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ bauerb@chromium.org, oshima@chromium.org, rdevlin.cronin@chromium.org

[Marc Treib, 2015-05-19 13:21:51]

oshima@chromium.org: Please review changes in c/a/theme.

rdevlin.cronin@chromium.org: Please review changes in c/b/extensions and
c/common/extensions.

bauerb@chromium.org: Please review changes in c/b/resources and
ui/webui/resources.

Thanks!

https://codereview.chromium.org/1051273002/diff/20001/chrome/browser/resource...
File chrome/browser/resources/extensions/extension_list.js (left):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1051273002/diff/20001/chrome/browser/resource...
chrome/browser/resources/extensions/extension_list.js:634: trash.hidden =
!extension.userMayModify;
Handled by css, no need to do it again here.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1051273002/diff/20001/chrome/browser/resource...
chrome/browser/resources/extensions/extension_list.js:709:
classes.push('may-not-modify');
The may-not-modify class doesn't actually do anything, so there's no need to set
it.

[Bernhard Bauer, 2015-05-19 15:11:11]

Web UI LGTM

[Devlin, 2015-05-19 16:17:16]

https://codereview.chromium.org/1051273002/diff/20001/chrome/common/extension...
File chrome/common/extensions/api/developer_private.idl (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1051273002/diff/20001/chrome/common/extension...
chrome/common/extensions/api/developer_private.idl:156: DOMString? controlledBy;
 // see controlled_indicator.css
These can, and probably should, be grouped together into a separate struct, say
ControlledInfo or ControlledStatus (which can then be optional on this).  That
way, we continue grouping similar things together, ensure that if controlledBy
exists, controlledByText also exists, etc.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1051273002/diff/20001/chrome/common/extension...
chrome/common/extensions/api/developer_private.idl:156: DOMString? controlledBy;
 // see controlled_indicator.css
This should really be an enum.  It will mean an extra line or two in the js, but
it will be cleaner overall.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1051273002/diff/20001/chrome/common/extension...
chrome/common/extensions/api/developer_private.idl:156: DOMString? controlledBy;
 // see controlled_indicator.css
These changes will need to be reflected in the externs
(third_party/closure_compiler/externs/developer_private.js).  Ping me if you
need any help. :)

[oshima, 2015-05-19 16:56:14]

c/a/theme lgtm

[Marc Treib, 2015-05-20 11:22:42]

https://codereview.chromium.org/1051273002/diff/20001/chrome/common/extension...
File chrome/common/extensions/api/developer_private.idl (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1051273002/diff/20001/chrome/common/extension...
chrome/common/extensions/api/developer_private.idl:156: DOMString? controlledBy;
 // see controlled_indicator.css
On 2015/05/19 16:17:16, Devlin wrote:
> This should really be an enum.  It will mean an extra line or two in the js,
but
> it will be cleaner overall.

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1051273002/diff/20001/chrome/common/extension...
chrome/common/extensions/api/developer_private.idl:156: DOMString? controlledBy;
 // see controlled_indicator.css
On 2015/05/19 16:17:16, Devlin wrote:
> These can, and probably should, be grouped together into a separate struct,
say
> ControlledInfo or ControlledStatus (which can then be optional on this).  That
> way, we continue grouping similar things together, ensure that if controlledBy
> exists, controlledByText also exists, etc.

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1051273002/diff/20001/chrome/common/extension...
chrome/common/extensions/api/developer_private.idl:156: DOMString? controlledBy;
 // see controlled_indicator.css
On 2015/05/19 16:17:16, Devlin wrote:
> These changes will need to be reflected in the externs
> (third_party/closure_compiler/externs/developer_private.js).  Ping me if you
> need any help. :)

Done (I think).

https://codereview.chromium.org/1051273002/diff/40001/third_party/closure_com...
File third_party/closure_compiler/externs/developer_private.js (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1051273002/diff/40001/third_party/closure_com...
third_party/closure_compiler/externs/developer_private.js:635: * @param
{DeleteExtensionErrorsProperties} properties The properties specifying
These descriptions were added by the closure compiler script. Not sure why they
weren't there before?

[Devlin, 2015-05-20 15:41:33]

lgtm.

It looks (from his message) like Bernhard may have only reviewed the WebUI, and
not the resources?  Please make sure someone has looked at the JS before
submitting. :)

Also, if you haven't, please run closure compiler on this to make sure nothing's
broken.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1051273002/diff/40001/chrome/common/extension...
File chrome/common/extensions/api/developer_private.idl (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1051273002/diff/40001/chrome/common/extension...
chrome/common/extensions/api/developer_private.idl:153: enum ControlledBy {  //
see controlled_indicator.css
I don't really love the name "ControlledBy"... what about ControllerType?  Or
does that sound too much like an input device?  WDYT?

Separately, this really shouldn't reference controlled_indicator.css (extension
apis shouldn't really cite "random" chromium source), and I don't think the
reference really adds much anymore.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1051273002/diff/40001/third_party/closure_com...
File third_party/closure_compiler/externs/developer_private.js (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1051273002/diff/40001/third_party/closure_com...
third_party/closure_compiler/externs/developer_private.js:635: * @param
{DeleteExtensionErrorsProperties} properties The properties specifying
On 2015/05/20 11:22:41, Marc Treib wrote:
> These descriptions were added by the closure compiler script. Not sure why
they
> weren't there before?

Someone (most likely me) probably updated the doc, but didn't bump the externs
because there was no functional change.  These changes are good.

That said, I think I recently pushed a patch that added these same ones when I
bumped the externs.  Might need to check for merge conflicts.

[Bernhard Bauer, 2015-05-20 16:08:07]

Sorry, I meant "Web UI" in the conceptual sense, i.e. native code and resources
:)

[Marc Treib, 2015-05-20 16:51:45]

When you say "please run closure compiler on this", by "this" you mean
developer_private.js? It complains about not knowing the type "ChromeEvent",
same before and after my CL.

If you meant extension_list.js, I get LOTS of errors even before my CL. Or maybe
I'm doing it wrong? I just ran
third_party/closure_compiler/compile.py
chrome/browser/resources/extensions/extension_list.js

https://codereview.chromium.org/1051273002/diff/40001/chrome/common/extension...
File chrome/common/extensions/api/developer_private.idl (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1051273002/diff/40001/chrome/common/extension...
chrome/common/extensions/api/developer_private.idl:153: enum ControlledBy {  //
see controlled_indicator.css
On 2015/05/20 15:41:33, Devlin wrote:
> I don't really love the name "ControlledBy"... what about ControllerType?  Or
> does that sound too much like an input device?  WDYT?

Hm. I think I dislike both equally :D
That means it's 1:0 for ControllerType -> Done.

> Separately, this really shouldn't reference controlled_indicator.css
(extension
> apis shouldn't really cite "random" chromium source), and I don't think the
> reference really adds much anymore.

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1051273002/diff/40001/third_party/closure_com...
File third_party/closure_compiler/externs/developer_private.js (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1051273002/diff/40001/third_party/closure_com...
third_party/closure_compiler/externs/developer_private.js:635: * @param
{DeleteExtensionErrorsProperties} properties The properties specifying
On 2015/05/20 15:41:33, Devlin wrote:
> On 2015/05/20 11:22:41, Marc Treib wrote:
> > These descriptions were added by the closure compiler script. Not sure why
> they
> > weren't there before?
> 
> Someone (most likely me) probably updated the doc, but didn't bump the externs
> because there was no functional change.  These changes are good.
> 
> That said, I think I recently pushed a patch that added these same ones when I
> bumped the externs.  Might need to check for merge conflicts.

Acknowledged.

[Devlin, 2015-05-20 16:55:46]

On 2015/05/20 16:51:45, Marc Treib wrote:
> When you say "please run closure compiler on this", by "this" you mean
> developer_private.js? It complains about not knowing the type "ChromeEvent",
> same before and after my CL.
> 
> If you meant extension_list.js, I get LOTS of errors even before my CL. Or
maybe
> I'm doing it wrong? I just ran
> third_party/closure_compiler/compile.py
> chrome/browser/resources/extensions/extension_list.js

https://code.google.com/p/chromium/wiki/ClosureCompilation :)  Follow the steps
in the "I just need to fix the compile!" section.

[Marc Treib, 2015-05-20 16:59:50]

On 2015/05/20 16:55:46, Devlin wrote:
> On 2015/05/20 16:51:45, Marc Treib wrote:
> > When you say "please run closure compiler on this", by "this" you mean
> > developer_private.js? It complains about not knowing the type "ChromeEvent",
> > same before and after my CL.
> > 
> > If you meant extension_list.js, I get LOTS of errors even before my CL. Or
> maybe
> > I'm doing it wrong? I just ran
> > third_party/closure_compiler/compile.py
> > chrome/browser/resources/extensions/extension_list.js
> 
> https://code.google.com/p/chromium/wiki/ClosureCompilation :)  Follow the
steps
> in the "I just need to fix the compile!" section.

Thanks! That doesn't produce any errors.
Out of curiosity, is there a reason why this isn't part of the regular build
process?

[Marc Treib, 2015-05-20 17:01:02]

treib@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ dbeam@chromium.org

[Marc Treib, 2015-05-20 17:01:02]

+dbeam to stamp the generated changes to
third_party/closure_compiler/externs/developer_private.js :)

[Devlin, 2015-05-20 17:08:51]

> Thanks! That doesn't produce any errors.
> Out of curiosity, is there a reason why this isn't part of the regular build
> process?

Dan would probably best know the answer to that.

[Dan Beam, 2015-05-20 17:46:09]

On 2015/05/20 17:08:51, Devlin wrote:
> > Thanks! That doesn't produce any errors.
> > Out of curiosity, is there a reason why this isn't part of the regular build
> > process?
> 
> Dan would probably best know the answer to that.

https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=468366

[Dan Beam, 2015-05-20 17:59:46]

lgtm

re: "why is this not part of the build process": well, if it's just a python
script that runs idl -> externs we could generate every time.  i originally
thought you were asking "why is closure compilation not part of the build
process/presubmit?" which is why I linked to the closure try bots bug (tl;dr -
java).

[Marc Treib, 2015-05-20 18:03:59]

On 2015/05/20 17:59:46, Dan Beam wrote:
> lgtm
> 
> re: "why is this not part of the build process": well, if it's just a python
> script that runs idl -> externs we could generate every time.  i originally
> thought you were asking "why is closure compilation not part of the build
> process/presubmit?" which is why I linked to the closure try bots bug (tl;dr -
> java).

Thanks for the explanation/link - I *was* actually asking about closure
compilation :)
Good to see that it's on the way!

[Marc Treib, 2015-05-20 18:04:04]

The CQ bit was checked by treib@chromium.org

[Marc Treib, 2015-05-20 18:04:05]

The patchset sent to the CQ was uploaded after l-g-t-m from bauerb@chromium.org,
oshima@chromium.org, rdevlin.cronin@chromium.org
Link to the patchset: https://codereview.chromium.org/1051273002/#ps80001
(title: "rebase")

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-05-20 18:04:38]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1051273002/80001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-05-20 19:56:34]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-05-20 19:56:36]

Try jobs failed on following builders:
  linux_chromium_chromeos_ozone_rel_ng on tryserver.chromium.linux (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.linux/builders/linux_chromium_...)

[Marc Treib, 2015-05-21 08:17:56]

The CQ bit was checked by treib@chromium.org

[Marc Treib, 2015-05-21 08:17:56]

The patchset sent to the CQ was uploaded after l-g-t-m from bauerb@chromium.org,
rdevlin.cronin@chromium.org, oshima@chromium.org, dbeam@chromium.org
Link to the patchset: https://codereview.chromium.org/1051273002/#ps100001
(title: "update test data")

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-05-21 08:18:18]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1051273002/100001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-05-21 10:36:21]

Committed patchset #6 (id:100001)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-05-21 10:37:06]

Patchset 6 (id:??) landed as
https://crrev.com/5c654f86279e4abef018d89c8d94611fe8edacc0
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#330928}