Integrate UI with authentication flow.

blimp/client/core/settings/android/blimp_settings_android.cc

+// Copyright 2016 The Chromium Authors. All rights reserved.
+// Use of this source code is governed by a BSD-style license that can be
+// found in the LICENSE file.
+
+#include "blimp/client/core/settings/android/blimp_settings_android.h"
+
+#include "blimp/client/core/session/identity_source.h"
+#include "blimp/client/public/blimp_client_context.h"
+#include "jni/AboutBlimpPreferences_jni.h"
+
+namespace blimp {
+namespace client {
+
+// static
+bool BlimpSettingsAndroid::RegisterJni(JNIEnv* env) {
+  return RegisterNativesImpl(env);
+}
+
+static jlong Init(JNIEnv* env,
+                  const base::android::JavaParamRef<jobject>& jobj) {
+  return reinterpret_cast<intptr_t>(new BlimpSettingsAndroid(env, jobj));
+}
+
+BlimpSettingsAndroid::BlimpSettingsAndroid(JNIEnv* env, jobject jobj)
+    : identity_source_(nullptr) {
+  java_obj_.Reset(env, jobj);
+}
+
+BlimpSettingsAndroid::~BlimpSettingsAndroid() {}
+
+void BlimpSettingsAndroid::Destroy(
+    JNIEnv* env,
+    const base::android::JavaParamRef<jobject>& jobj) {
+  identity_source_->RemoveObserver(this);

[David Trainor- moved to gerrit, 2016/08/29 05:12:24]

DCHECK(identity_source_)?

[xingliu, 2016/08/30 04:47:42]

Done.

+  delete this;
+}
+
+void BlimpSettingsAndroid::SetIdentitySource(IdentitySource* identity_source) {

[David Trainor- moved to gerrit, 2016/08/29 05:12:24]

We actually want to call RemoveObserver on the old IdentitySource, not the new
one right?

[xingliu, 2016/08/30 04:47:42]

This code is just to avoid SetIdentitySource called more than once.
But I'll remove the first RemoveObserver call, it seems not make too much sense.

There is only one identitySource. But the jni of this UI can be created and
destroyed.

[David Trainor- moved to gerrit, 2016/08/30 20:46:29]

I think the remove call is safe unless we add DCHECK(!identity_source_) before
we set it.  You could just do:

if (identity_source_)
  identity_source_->RemoveObserver(this);

before setting identity_source_ to the new identity_source.

[xingliu, 2016/08/30 22:27:36]

Oh, I understand now. Added this before changing identity_source.

+  identity_source_ = identity_source;
+  DCHECK(identity_source_);
+
+  // Listen to sign in state change.
+  identity_source->RemoveObserver(this);
+  identity_source->AddObserver(this);
+}
+
+void BlimpSettingsAndroid::OnSignedOut() {
+  Java_AboutBlimpPreferences_onSignedOut(base::android::AttachCurrentThread(),
+                                         java_obj_);
+}
+
+void BlimpSettingsAndroid::OnSignedIn() {
+  Java_AboutBlimpPreferences_onSignedIn(base::android::AttachCurrentThread(),
+                                        java_obj_);
+}
+
+void BlimpSettingsAndroid::OnActiveAccountLogout() {
+  OnSignedOut();

[David Trainor- moved to gerrit, 2016/08/29 05:12:24]

How much of this do we want to share with Linux?  It feels like we really want
to share most of this logic and flow but just expose the UX to the front end
right?

[xingliu, 2016/08/30 04:47:42]

The code here is only for UX, I'll expose the identity source to base class, so
linux can listen to sign in state change by adding itself as listener in context
impl.

[David Trainor- moved to gerrit, 2016/08/30 20:46:29]

Acknowledged.

+}
+
+void BlimpSettingsAndroid::OnActiveAccountLogin() {
+  OnSignedIn();
+}
+
+}  // namespace client
+}  // namespace blimp