cros: Ensure quick unlock is disabled by default for enterprise policy.

components/policy/tools/generate_policy_source.py

Index: components/policy/tools/generate_policy_source.py
diff --git a/components/policy/tools/generate_policy_source.py b/components/policy/tools/generate_policy_source.py
index 4da66966d30eb364f950fb7865a27fd50f500bd7..af30e0ab9eec211cae115e3ee917edcc010a6e22 100755
--- a/components/policy/tools/generate_policy_source.py
+++ b/components/policy/tools/generate_policy_source.py
@@ -746,6 +746,9 @@ def _WritePolicyConstantSource(policies, os, f, riskTags):
       elif policy.policy_type == 'Type::STRING':
         creation_expression = 'new base::StringValue("%s")' %\
                               policy.enterprise_default
+      elif (policy.policy_type == 'Type::LIST' and

[pastarmovj, 2017/01/23 23:38:12]

If I get this right this code will only work for empty lists right? Any other
case is not handled. Since you are adding this case I would appreciate if it
covers non-empty lists too. 

I know it will be more involved than the other cases above but I think we should
strive for correctness here.

Also in the spirit of the results of the last Googlegeist I shall ask you to
write some tests for this code especially since your case will be more complex
than the trivial ones above. :)

[Thiemo Nagel, 2017/01/24 10:27:35]

+1 to that.

[jdufault, 2017/01/25 01:32:43]

I've extended the logic, but I don't see a relatively reasonable way to test
this. The existing tests just load up existing policy (generated via the normal
compile cycle) and check if the default value is set (ie, e2e test). I don't see
any support for explicitly invoking this python file and giving it arbitrary
input.

While testing would be nice, it looks like a much bigger task than what this CL
should encompass.

[pastarmovj, 2017/01/25 15:28:05]

I think the easiest (and complete) way to test this is to write a python test
file similar to the PRESUBMIT_test.py in src/ that will invoke this script pass
it a minimal json file and verify the output matches the expected result.

I think it is indeed a good idea to do this in a separate CL (optimally tracked
by a separate bug). However I will appreciate it if you would bootstrap this
effort now that you have spent some time with this code. 

+            policy.enterprise_default == []):
+        creation_expression = 'new base::ListValue()'
       else:
         raise RuntimeError('Type %s of policy %s is not supported at '
                            'enterprise defaults' % (policy.policy_type,