Factor PropertyTreeManager out of PaintArtifactCompositor.

Factor PropertyTreeManager out of PaintArtifactCompositor.

BUG=674258
CQ_INCLUDE_TRYBOTS=master.tryserver.chromium.linux:linux_layout_tests_slimming_paint_v2

Review-Url: https://codereview.chromium.org/2627113005
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#444150}
Committed: https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/9bf3bd10297e90363f9d68ba23569ba4e2fe57da

[wkorman, 2017-01-13 00:37:55]

Description was changed from

==========
Factor PropertyTreeManager out of PaintArtifactCompositor.

BUG=674258
==========

to

==========
Factor PropertyTreeManager out of PaintArtifactCompositor.

BUG=674258
CQ_INCLUDE_TRYBOTS=master.tryserver.chromium.linux:linux_layout_tests_slimming_paint_v2
==========

[wkorman, 2017-01-13 00:44:09]

wkorman@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ ajuma@chromium.org, pdr@chromium.org

[wkorman, 2017-01-13 00:44:10]

Exploring per my comment in http://crrev.com/2626353002. IMO this improves
maintainability and allows for more easily adding unit tests specifically for
PropertyTreeManager if we conclude that is of value. It does theoretically
expose PropertyTreeManager to other callsites. We could make ctor private and
friend PaintArtifactCompositor but then PAC has access to the
actually-intended-to-be-private members, so I preferred to keep a public/private
API and just rely on documentation comment.

Immediate motivation is my need to enact step 3 in http://crbug.com/674258#c1
and in working through understanding exist logic, figuring out where to add our
new code, and considering what tests to write, I found I really wished the code
were broken out.

I've not added new unit tests or moved existing ones from
PaintArtifactCompositorTest yet. Propose seeing how test placement turns out in
my next change where I actually write the code to build the new maps.

[ajuma, 2017-01-13 01:09:12]

lgtm, I think this makes the code easier to understand/maintain. IMO relying on
documentation/review to prevent other callsites from using PropertyTreeManager
should be sufficient

[pdr., 2017-01-13 05:02:30]

On 2017/01/13 at 01:09:12, ajuma wrote:
> lgtm, I think this makes the code easier to understand/maintain. IMO relying
on documentation/review to prevent other callsites from using
PropertyTreeManager should be sufficient

LGTM 2

[wkorman, 2017-01-17 19:48:11]

The CQ bit was checked by wkorman@chromium.org

[wkorman, 2017-01-17 19:48:11]

The patchset sent to the CQ was uploaded after l-g-t-m from ajuma@chromium.org,
pdr@chromium.org
Link to the patchset: https://codereview.chromium.org/2627113005/#ps20001
(title: "Sync to head.")

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-01-17 19:49:00]

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, 2017-01-17 21:28:25]

CQ is committing da patch.

Bot data: {"patchset_id": 20001, "attempt_start_ts": 1484682491079160,
"parent_rev": "5e61528ed7a6cd174f97e14d4cd29b91f8e8baf3", "commit_rev":
"9bf3bd10297e90363f9d68ba23569ba4e2fe57da"}

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-01-17 21:28:59]

Description was changed from

==========
Factor PropertyTreeManager out of PaintArtifactCompositor.

BUG=674258
CQ_INCLUDE_TRYBOTS=master.tryserver.chromium.linux:linux_layout_tests_slimming_paint_v2
==========

to

==========
Factor PropertyTreeManager out of PaintArtifactCompositor.

BUG=674258
CQ_INCLUDE_TRYBOTS=master.tryserver.chromium.linux:linux_layout_tests_slimming_paint_v2

Review-Url: https://codereview.chromium.org/2627113005
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#444150}
Committed:
https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/9bf3bd10297e90363f9d68ba2356...
==========

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-01-17 21:29:00]

Committed patchset #2 (id:20001) as
https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/9bf3bd10297e90363f9d68ba2356...