Set name for WindowTree of WindowManager

Set name for WindowTree of WindowManager

The WindowTree of WindowManager's name will be set as mojo::ash.

BUG=626734
R=sky@chromium.org

[xing.xu, 2016-09-02 07:18:10]

Description was changed from

==========
Set name for WindowTree of WindowManager

The WindowTree of WindowManager's name will be set as mojo::ash.

BUG=626734
==========

to

==========
Set name for WindowTree of WindowManager

The WindowTree of WindowManager's name will be set as mojo::ash.

BUG=626734
R=sky@chromium.org
==========

[xing.xu, 2016-09-02 07:18:19]

The CQ bit was checked by xing.xu@intel.com

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-09-02 07:18:35]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 
https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/v2/patch-status/codereview.chromium.or...

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-09-02 07:18:35]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-09-02 07:18:36]

No L-G-T-M from a valid reviewer yet. 
CQ run can only be started by full committers or once the patch has
received an L-G-T-M from a full committer.
Even if an L-G-T-M may have been provided, it was from a non-committer,
_not_ a full super star committer.
See http://www.chromium.org/getting-involved/become-a-committer
Note that this has nothing to do with OWNERS files.

[xing.xu, 2016-09-02 07:23:05]

Hi, this fix can set a valid name for WindowTree of WindowManager.
Please help to review. thx.

[xing.xu, 2016-09-02 07:23:26]

xing.xu@intel.com changed reviewers:
+ sky@chromium.org

[xing.xu, 2016-09-02 07:23:27]

Hi, this fix can set a valid name for WindowTree of WindowManager.
Please help to review. thx.

[sky, 2016-09-02 14:20:39]

https://codereview.chromium.org/2306003002/diff/40001/services/ui/service.cc
File services/ui/service.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2306003002/diff/40001/services/ui/service.cc#...
services/ui/service.cc:320: remote_identity.user_id(), remote_identity.name(),
std::move(request));
Can you outline why are doing this change? The identity is already passed in as
the first parameter.

[xing.xu, 2016-09-03 03:08:04]

On 2016/09/02 14:20:39, sky wrote:
> https://codereview.chromium.org/2306003002/diff/40001/services/ui/service.cc
> File services/ui/service.cc (right):
> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/2306003002/diff/40001/services/ui/service.cc#...
> services/ui/service.cc:320: remote_identity.user_id(), remote_identity.name(),
> std::move(request));
> Can you outline why are doing this change? The identity is already passed in
as
> the first parameter.

I am not sure if the remote_identity.user_id(), remote_identity.name() are the
same. I follow the style here:
https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src.git/+/master/services/ui/ws/wi...
https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src.git/+/master/services/ui/ws/wi...
     WindowTreeFactory::WindowTreeFactory(WindowServer* window_server,
                                     const UserId& user_id,
                                     const std::string& client_name,
                                     mojom::WindowTreeFactoryRequest request)

https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src.git/+/master/services/ui/servi...
     new ws::WindowTreeFactory(window_server_.get(), remote_identity.user_id(),
                            remote_identity.name(), std::move(request));

[xing.xu, 2016-09-03 06:18:40]

After run a test, found that user_id an dname are different:
remote_identity.user_id()=505C0EE9-3013-43C0-82B0-A84F50CFXXXX
remote_identity.name()=mojo:ash

[xing.xu, 2016-09-06 00:28:01]

Hi, Please help to review.

[sky, 2016-09-06 19:48:43]

I don't think this change is useful. NOT LGTM

[xing.xu, 2016-09-07 14:48:17]

The CQ bit was checked by xing.xu@intel.com

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-09-07 14:48:32]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 
https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/v2/patch-status/codereview.chromium.or...

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-09-07 14:48:32]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-09-07 14:48:33]

A disapproval has been posted by following reviewers: sky@chromium.org.
Please make sure to get positive review before another CQ attempt.