Add the IDL and stub implementation for the chrome.autofillPrivate API.

Add the IDL and stub implementation for the chrome.autofillPrivate API.

See https://docs.google.com/document/d/1AZmbifXOirRdIcAkhgXT_u1wam5FRxy-Wt7I-kv3CCg/edit?usp=sharing for details.

BUG=479306
Committed: https://crrev.com/42f03866782cc98e745a155294d5465d91858c1f
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#326864}

[Dan Beam, 2015-04-22 22:13:56]

https://codereview.chromium.org/1099313003/diff/1/chrome/common/extensions/ap...
File chrome/common/extensions/api/autofill_private.idl (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1099313003/diff/1/chrome/common/extensions/ap...
chrome/common/extensions/api/autofill_private.idl:166: static void
onAddressListChanged(CreditCardEntry[] entries);
nit: onCreditCardListChanged ;)

[Kyle Horimoto, 2015-04-22 22:19:37]

https://codereview.chromium.org/1099313003/diff/1/chrome/common/extensions/ap...
File chrome/common/extensions/api/autofill_private.idl (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1099313003/diff/1/chrome/common/extensions/ap...
chrome/common/extensions/api/autofill_private.idl:166: static void
onAddressListChanged(CreditCardEntry[] entries);
On 2015/04/22 22:13:56, Dan Beam wrote:
> nit: onCreditCardListChanged ;)

Done.

[not at google - send to devlin, 2015-04-22 22:24:42]

kalman@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ kalman@chromium.org

[not at google - send to devlin, 2015-04-22 22:24:43]

https://codereview.chromium.org/1099313003/diff/1/chrome/common/extensions/ap...
File chrome/common/extensions/api/autofill_private.idl (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1099313003/diff/1/chrome/common/extensions/ap...
chrome/common/extensions/api/autofill_private.idl:9: enum AddressField {
Not used

https://codereview.chromium.org/1099313003/diff/1/chrome/common/extensions/ap...
chrome/common/extensions/api/autofill_private.idl:25: // Short summary of the
address which is displalyed in the UI; an
displayed

https://codereview.chromium.org/1099313003/diff/1/chrome/common/extensions/ap...
chrome/common/extensions/api/autofill_private.idl:33: DOMString summarySublabel;
Will there always be a sublabel?

https://codereview.chromium.org/1099313003/diff/1/chrome/common/extensions/ap...
chrome/common/extensions/api/autofill_private.idl:52: DOMString companyName;
Should some of these entries be optional?

https://codereview.chromium.org/1099313003/diff/1/chrome/common/extensions/ap...
chrome/common/extensions/api/autofill_private.idl:143: static DOMString[]
validatePhoneNumbers(DOMString[] phoneNumbers,
For large numbers of arguments, better to pass in a single dictionary instead of
individual arguments.

[Kyle Horimoto, 2015-04-22 23:27:02]

Working on adding stub implementation functions now.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1099313003/diff/1/chrome/common/extensions/ap...
File chrome/common/extensions/api/autofill_private.idl (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1099313003/diff/1/chrome/common/extensions/ap...
chrome/common/extensions/api/autofill_private.idl:9: enum AddressField {
On 2015/04/22 22:24:42, kalman wrote:
> Not used

Sorry, I forgot to add in the AddressComponent dictionary. It's used now.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1099313003/diff/1/chrome/common/extensions/ap...
chrome/common/extensions/api/autofill_private.idl:25: // Short summary of the
address which is displalyed in the UI; an
On 2015/04/22 22:24:42, kalman wrote:
> displayed

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1099313003/diff/1/chrome/common/extensions/ap...
chrome/common/extensions/api/autofill_private.idl:33: DOMString summarySublabel;
On 2015/04/22 22:24:42, kalman wrote:
> Will there always be a sublabel?

Made it optional.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1099313003/diff/1/chrome/common/extensions/ap...
chrome/common/extensions/api/autofill_private.idl:52: DOMString companyName;
On 2015/04/22 22:24:42, kalman wrote:
> Should some of these entries be optional?

You're right - in fact, all of them should be optional. The existing settings
page just passed empty strings when nothing was available so I just copied that,
but now that we have a real API, it's better just to leave them optional.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1099313003/diff/1/chrome/common/extensions/ap...
chrome/common/extensions/api/autofill_private.idl:143: static DOMString[]
validatePhoneNumbers(DOMString[] phoneNumbers,
On 2015/04/22 22:24:42, kalman wrote:
> For large numbers of arguments, better to pass in a single dictionary instead
of
> individual arguments.

Done.

[Kyle Horimoto, 2015-04-23 02:13:30]

khorimoto@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ dbeam@chromium.org, mpearson@chromium.org, stevenjb@chromium.org

[Mark P, 2015-04-23 04:03:07]

histograms.xml lgtm
note that you will have to sync before submitting; it's obvious to me this file
and the extension functions file is out of date

[not at google - send to devlin, 2015-04-23 19:35:52]

lgtm

https://codereview.chromium.org/1099313003/diff/120001/chrome/browser/extensi...
File chrome/browser/extensions/api/autofill_private/autofill_private_api.h
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1099313003/diff/120001/chrome/browser/extensi...
chrome/browser/extensions/api/autofill_private/autofill_private_api.h:17: //
Implements the chrome.autofillPrivate.saveAddress method.
I don't think these class comments are particularly useful. The
DECLARE_EXTENSION_FUNCTION macro, or even just the name of the class, is enough
to imply it.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1099313003/diff/120001/chrome/common/extensio...
File chrome/common/extensions/permissions/chrome_api_permissions.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1099313003/diff/120001/chrome/common/extensio...
chrome/common/extensions/permissions/chrome_api_permissions.cc:346:
APIPermissionInfo::kFlagCannotBeOptional,
I wonder why there are so many permissions in this file that can't be optional,
and so I filed crbug.com/480576 for that. In this case I don't see any harm in
it being optional.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1099313003/diff/120001/third_party/closure_co...
File third_party/closure_compiler/externs/autofill_private.js (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1099313003/diff/120001/third_party/closure_co...
third_party/closure_compiler/externs/autofill_private.js:1:
autofill_private_externs.js
what is this line?

[not at google - send to devlin, 2015-04-23 19:46:56]

oh, and add an OWNERS file

[Kyle Horimoto, 2015-04-23 20:23:14]

On 2015/04/23 19:46:56, kalman wrote:
> oh, and add an OWNERS file

Done.

[Kyle Horimoto, 2015-04-23 20:23:31]

https://codereview.chromium.org/1099313003/diff/120001/chrome/browser/extensi...
File chrome/browser/extensions/api/autofill_private/autofill_private_api.h
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1099313003/diff/120001/chrome/browser/extensi...
chrome/browser/extensions/api/autofill_private/autofill_private_api.h:17: //
Implements the chrome.autofillPrivate.saveAddress method.
On 2015/04/23 19:35:52, kalman wrote:
> I don't think these class comments are particularly useful. The
> DECLARE_EXTENSION_FUNCTION macro, or even just the name of the class, is
enough
> to imply it.

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1099313003/diff/120001/chrome/common/extensio...
File chrome/common/extensions/permissions/chrome_api_permissions.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1099313003/diff/120001/chrome/common/extensio...
chrome/common/extensions/permissions/chrome_api_permissions.cc:346:
APIPermissionInfo::kFlagCannotBeOptional,
On 2015/04/23 19:35:52, kalman wrote:
> I wonder why there are so many permissions in this file that can't be
optional,
> and so I filed crbug.com/480576 for that. In this case I don't see any harm in
> it being optional.

Shouldn't it be non-optional? Without the permission, the settings page would
not be fully functional.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1099313003/diff/120001/third_party/closure_co...
File third_party/closure_compiler/externs/autofill_private.js (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1099313003/diff/120001/third_party/closure_co...
third_party/closure_compiler/externs/autofill_private.js:1:
autofill_private_externs.js
On 2015/04/23 19:35:52, kalman wrote:
> what is this line?

No idea how this got here. Thanks for catching it.

[Dan Beam, 2015-04-23 20:49:13]

https://codereview.chromium.org/1099313003/diff/130001/chrome/browser/extensi...
File chrome/browser/extensions/api/autofill_private/autofill_private_api.cc
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1099313003/diff/130001/chrome/browser/extensi...
chrome/browser/extensions/api/autofill_private/autofill_private_api.cc:7:
#include "base/values.h"
don't include something in the .h and the .cc (only one or the other)

https://codereview.chromium.org/1099313003/diff/130001/chrome/browser/extensi...
File chrome/browser/extensions/api/autofill_private/autofill_private_api.h
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1099313003/diff/130001/chrome/browser/extensi...
chrome/browser/extensions/api/autofill_private/autofill_private_api.h:12:
#include "base/values.h"
why are values.h and scoped_ptr.h needed?

https://codereview.chromium.org/1099313003/diff/130001/chrome/common/extensio...
File chrome/common/extensions/permissions/chrome_api_permissions.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1099313003/diff/130001/chrome/common/extensio...
chrome/common/extensions/permissions/chrome_api_permissions.cc:343:
PermissionMessage::kAutofillPrivate},
^ why did you change this?

[Kyle Horimoto, 2015-04-23 22:00:26]

https://codereview.chromium.org/1099313003/diff/130001/chrome/browser/extensi...
File chrome/browser/extensions/api/autofill_private/autofill_private_api.cc
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1099313003/diff/130001/chrome/browser/extensi...
chrome/browser/extensions/api/autofill_private/autofill_private_api.cc:7:
#include "base/values.h"
On 2015/04/23 20:49:12, Dan Beam wrote:
> don't include something in the .h and the .cc (only one or the other)

Acknowledged.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1099313003/diff/130001/chrome/browser/extensi...
File chrome/browser/extensions/api/autofill_private/autofill_private_api.h
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1099313003/diff/130001/chrome/browser/extensi...
chrome/browser/extensions/api/autofill_private/autofill_private_api.h:12:
#include "base/values.h"
On 2015/04/23 20:49:13, Dan Beam wrote:
> why are values.h and scoped_ptr.h needed?

Removed.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1099313003/diff/130001/chrome/common/extensio...
File chrome/common/extensions/permissions/chrome_api_permissions.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1099313003/diff/130001/chrome/common/extensio...
chrome/common/extensions/permissions/chrome_api_permissions.cc:343:
PermissionMessage::kAutofillPrivate},
On 2015/04/23 20:49:13, Dan Beam wrote:
> ^ why did you change this?

Fixed, thanks for catching it.

[stevenjb, 2015-04-24 03:13:35]

Nice. LGTM.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1099313003/diff/210001/chrome/common/extensio...
File chrome/common/extensions/api/_permission_features.json (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1099313003/diff/210001/chrome/common/extensio...
chrome/common/extensions/api/_permission_features.json:72: // TODO(khorimoto):
Whitelist the settings app once it's an app.
We're going to have a bunch of these which we will enable if/when we create a
settings app. I don't think we need a bunch of TODO statements here for that.

[Kyle Horimoto, 2015-04-24 17:13:57]

https://codereview.chromium.org/1099313003/diff/210001/chrome/common/extensio...
File chrome/common/extensions/api/_permission_features.json (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1099313003/diff/210001/chrome/common/extensio...
chrome/common/extensions/api/_permission_features.json:72: // TODO(khorimoto):
Whitelist the settings app once it's an app.
On 2015/04/24 03:13:35, stevenjb wrote:
> We're going to have a bunch of these which we will enable if/when we create a
> settings app. I don't think we need a bunch of TODO statements here for that.

Done.

[Kyle Horimoto, 2015-04-24 17:28:29]

The CQ bit was checked by khorimoto@chromium.org

[Kyle Horimoto, 2015-04-24 17:28:29]

The patchset sent to the CQ was uploaded after l-g-t-m from
mpearson@chromium.org, kalman@chromium.org, stevenjb@chromium.org
Link to the patchset: https://codereview.chromium.org/1099313003/#ps270001
(title: "Rebased.")

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-04-24 17:29:20]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1099313003/270001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-04-24 17:36:56]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-04-24 17:36:58]

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

[Tyler Breisacher (Chromium), 2015-04-24 17:42:54]

tbreisacher@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ tbreisacher@chromium.org

[Tyler Breisacher (Chromium), 2015-04-24 17:42:55]

https://codereview.chromium.org/1099313003/diff/270001/third_party/closure_co...
File third_party/closure_compiler/externs/autofill_private.js (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1099313003/diff/270001/third_party/closure_co...
third_party/closure_compiler/externs/autofill_private.js:1: // Copyright 2015
The Chromium Authors. All rights reserved.
lgtm for this file since it's auto-generated anyway

[Kyle Horimoto, 2015-04-24 17:44:26]

The CQ bit was checked by khorimoto@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-04-24 17:44:50]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1099313003/270001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-04-24 18:46:40]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-04-24 18:46:42]

Try jobs failed on following builders:
  win_chromium_x64_rel_ng on tryserver.chromium.win (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.win/builders/win_chromium_x64_...)

[Kyle Horimoto, 2015-04-24 19:09:03]

The CQ bit was checked by khorimoto@chromium.org

[Kyle Horimoto, 2015-04-24 19:09:03]

The patchset sent to the CQ was uploaded after l-g-t-m from
stevenjb@chromium.org, mpearson@chromium.org, tbreisacher@chromium.org,
kalman@chromium.org
Link to the patchset: https://codereview.chromium.org/1099313003/#ps290001
(title: "Rebased, and added credit card name as a CreditCardEntry field.")

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-04-24 19:09:53]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1099313003/290001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-04-24 20:19:17]

Committed patchset #16 (id:290001)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-04-24 20:20:09]

Patchset 16 (id:??) landed as
https://crrev.com/42f03866782cc98e745a155294d5465d91858c1f
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#326864}