Add files from google3 to Git repo.

Add files added to Skia HEAD in google3 to the Git repo.

LICENSE is modified in google3 to mention some code copied from other projects.

BUG=skia:

Committed: https://skia.googlesource.com/skia/+/787ca87b338a5fcd0612b70815cc7d5438c42983

[dogben, 2015-08-13 17:28:25]

benjaminwagner@google.com changed reviewers:
+ mtklein@google.com

[mtklein, 2015-08-13 17:40:58]

On 2015/08/13 17:28:26, Ben Wagner wrote:

Hmm, I may have missed this before, but we might consider excluding
src/animator.

[mtklein, 2015-08-13 17:41:27]

mtklein@google.com changed reviewers:
+ reed@google.com

[mtklein, 2015-08-13 17:41:27]

+Mike, in case he's got an opinion on LICENSE.

[dogben, 2015-08-13 18:02:00]

Patchset #2 (id:20001) has been deleted

[dogben, 2015-08-13 18:02:08]

Patchset #2 (id:40001) has been deleted

[dogben, 2015-08-17 13:35:16]

PTAL

[mtklein, 2015-08-17 15:37:11]

lgtm

Adding Cary and Heather as FYI.

[mtklein, 2015-08-17 15:45:52]

The CQ bit was checked by mtklein@google.com

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-08-17 15:46:03]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1291603003/60001
View timeline at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-timeline/1291603003/60001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-08-17 15:46:43]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-08-17 15:46:44]

Try jobs failed on following builders:
  Test-Ubuntu-GCC-GCE-CPU-AVX2-x86_64-Release-Shared-Trybot on client.skia
(JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/client.skia/builders/Test-Ubuntu-GCC-GCE-CPU-AVX2...)
  Build-Ubuntu-GCC-Arm64-Debug-Android-Trybot on client.skia.compile
(JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/client.skia.compile/builders/Build-Ubuntu-GCC-Arm...)
  Build-Ubuntu-GCC-Arm7-Debug-Android-Trybot on client.skia.compile (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/client.skia.compile/builders/Build-Ubuntu-GCC-Arm...)
  Build-Ubuntu-GCC-x86_64-Release-Trybot on client.skia.compile (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/client.skia.compile/builders/Build-Ubuntu-GCC-x86...)

[mtklein, 2015-08-17 15:50:55]

On 2015/08/17 15:46:44, commit-bot: I haz the power wrote:
> Try jobs failed on following builders:
>   Test-Ubuntu-GCC-GCE-CPU-AVX2-x86_64-Release-Shared-Trybot on client.skia
> (JOB_FAILED,
>
http://build.chromium.org/p/client.skia/builders/Test-Ubuntu-GCC-GCE-CPU-AVX2...)
>   Build-Ubuntu-GCC-Arm64-Debug-Android-Trybot on client.skia.compile
> (JOB_FAILED,
>
http://build.chromium.org/p/client.skia.compile/builders/Build-Ubuntu-GCC-Arm...)
>   Build-Ubuntu-GCC-Arm7-Debug-Android-Trybot on client.skia.compile
(JOB_FAILED,
>
http://build.chromium.org/p/client.skia.compile/builders/Build-Ubuntu-GCC-Arm...)
>   Build-Ubuntu-GCC-x86_64-Release-Trybot on client.skia.compile (JOB_FAILED,
>
http://build.chromium.org/p/client.skia.compile/builders/Build-Ubuntu-GCC-x86...)

Needs rebase?

[dogben, 2015-08-17 16:32:08]

The CQ bit was checked by benjaminwagner@google.com to run a CQ dry run

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-08-17 16:32:15]

Dry run: CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1291603003/80001
View timeline at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-timeline/1291603003/80001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-08-17 16:32:55]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-08-17 16:32:56]

Dry run: Try jobs failed on following builders:
  skia_presubmit-Trybot on client.skia.fyi (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/client.skia.fyi/builders/skia_presubmit-Trybot/bu...)

[mtklein_C, 2015-08-17 17:21:40]

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

[mtklein_C, 2015-08-17 17:21:40]

If all goes well now at head, the changes to LICENSE should not be necessary. 
We've removed third_party/etc1 and the code in pathops that was under a
different license.

[mtklein, 2015-08-17 18:25:47]

On 2015/08/17 17:21:40, mtklein_C wrote:
> If all goes well now at head, the changes to LICENSE should not be necessary. 
> We've removed third_party/etc1 and the code in pathops that was under a
> different license.

Oof.  Had to put third_party/etc1 back, but the pathops code is still gone.

[dogben, 2015-08-17 18:33:28]

The CQ bit was checked by benjaminwagner@google.com to run a CQ dry run

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-08-17 18:33:38]

Dry run: CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1291603003/100001
View timeline at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-timeline/1291603003/100001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-08-17 18:40:32]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-08-17 18:40:33]

Dry run: This issue passed the CQ dry run.

[dogben, 2015-08-17 18:48:23]

On 2015/08/17 18:25:47, mtklein wrote:
> On 2015/08/17 17:21:40, mtklein_C wrote:
> > If all goes well now at head, the changes to LICENSE should not be
necessary. 
> > We've removed third_party/etc1 and the code in pathops that was under a
> > different license.
> 
> Oof.  Had to put third_party/etc1 back, but the pathops code is still gone.

Ok, I updated LICENSE. CQ is barfing on the line-ending changes, so I reverted
that. I might have to add those files to the g4 ignore list.

[mtklein_C, 2015-08-17 19:43:38]

On 2015/08/17 18:48:23, Ben Wagner wrote:
> On 2015/08/17 18:25:47, mtklein wrote:
> > On 2015/08/17 17:21:40, mtklein_C wrote:
> > > If all goes well now at head, the changes to LICENSE should not be
> necessary. 
> > > We've removed third_party/etc1 and the code in pathops that was under a
> > > different license.
> > 
> > Oof.  Had to put third_party/etc1 back, but the pathops code is still gone.
> 
> Ok, I updated LICENSE. CQ is barfing on the line-ending changes, so I reverted
> that. I might have to add those files to the g4 ignore list.

Grab the new BUILD.public now?

[dogben, 2015-08-17 19:51:01]

On 2015/08/17 19:43:38, mtklein_C wrote:
> On 2015/08/17 18:48:23, Ben Wagner wrote:
> > On 2015/08/17 18:25:47, mtklein wrote:
> > > On 2015/08/17 17:21:40, mtklein_C wrote:
> > > > If all goes well now at head, the changes to LICENSE should not be
> > necessary. 
> > > > We've removed third_party/etc1 and the code in pathops that was under a
> > > > different license.
> > > 
> > > Oof.  Had to put third_party/etc1 back, but the pathops code is still
gone.
> > 
> > Ok, I updated LICENSE. CQ is barfing on the line-ending changes, so I
reverted
> > that. I might have to add those files to the g4 ignore list.
> 
> Grab the new BUILD.public now?

Done.

[mtklein, 2015-08-17 19:52:00]

The CQ bit was checked by mtklein@google.com

[mtklein, 2015-08-17 19:52:01]

The patchset sent to the CQ was uploaded after l-g-t-m from mtklein@google.com
Link to the patchset: https://codereview.chromium.org/1291603003/#ps120001
(title: "Remove BUILD, add BUILD.public, and update sync script to replace
BUILD.google with BUILD.")

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-08-17 19:52:13]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1291603003/120001
View timeline at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-timeline/1291603003/120001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-08-17 19:58:13]

Committed patchset #5 (id:120001) as
https://skia.googlesource.com/skia/+/787ca87b338a5fcd0612b70815cc7d5438c42983

[hal.canary, 2015-08-17 21:45:46]

halcanary@google.com changed reviewers:
+ halcanary@google.com

[hal.canary, 2015-08-17 21:45:47]

https://codereview.chromium.org/1291603003/diff/120001/BUILD.public
File BUILD.public (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1291603003/diff/120001/BUILD.public#newcode65
BUILD.public:65: "src/doc/*_XPS.cpp",
exclude src/doc/SkDocument_PDF_None.cpp ?

[mtklein, 2015-08-17 21:52:54]

https://codereview.chromium.org/1291603003/diff/120001/BUILD.public
File BUILD.public (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1291603003/diff/120001/BUILD.public#newcode65
BUILD.public:65: "src/doc/*_XPS.cpp",
On 2015/08/17 21:45:47, Hal Canary wrote:
> exclude src/doc/SkDocument_PDF_None.cpp ?

Yes, this will need to be done before we roll to head or we'll end up with
duplicate symbol definitions when linking.