Password bubble: ManagePasswordsIconView is now a BubbleIconView.

Password bubble: ManagePasswordsIconView is now a BubbleIconView.

This CL introduces a new browser command to open the Manage Passwords bubble,
and converts the ManagePasswordsIconView class into a subclass of
BubbleIconView, which uses the new command to control the bubble's state.
This allows us to more easily test the view and the UI controller, as each
object's job is now more clearly defined (and the view is now doing a good
deal less work), and to independently verify that the command is doing the
right thing.

After this CL, we'll (finally!) have something approaching reasonable test
coverage for the core of the views code.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is a re-land of r267195, which was reverted due to Windows errors. That
was a reland of r266859, which was reverted due to LSAN errors. The
original review is https://codereview.chromium.org/246393004/.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

BUG=365678
TBR=vabr@chromium.org,pkasting@chromium.org,cpu@chromium.org

Committed: https://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=268159

[Mike West, 2014-05-02 09:59:22]

Hi Vaclav, would you mind sanity-checking the diff between patchset 1 and 2? The
second solves some problems I was able to reproduce under chromiumos setups, and
I'm hopeful that the similar Windows issues that we couldn't reproduce locally
will also be fixed. :/

Thanks!

-mike

[vabr (Chromium), 2014-05-02 10:12:58]

Hi Mike,

I checked the diff of patch set 2 against 1, and found nothing insane. :)

LGTM,
Vaclav

[Mike West, 2014-05-02 10:28:46]

On 2014/05/02 10:12:58, vabr (Chromium) wrote:
> Hi Mike,
> 
> I checked the diff of patch set 2 against 1, and found nothing insane. :)
> 
> LGTM,
> Vaclav

Thanks! Let's see if the win_chromium_dbg not agrees with you!

[Peter Kasting, 2014-05-02 19:01:37]

You added cpu and me as reviewers, which I assume was intentional since we
weren't on the original review.  What did you want us each to review?  (This is
especially odd since we're TBRed.)

[Mike West, 2014-05-03 14:32:26]

On 2014/05/02 19:01:37, Peter Kasting wrote:
> You added cpu and me as reviewers, which I assume was intentional since we
> weren't on the original review.  What did you want us each to review?  (This
is
> especially odd since we're TBRed.)

This is a reland of a reland[1] of a patch you reviewed[2]. Sorry I didn't make
that clear, I've updated the description accordingly.

[1]: https://codereview.chromium.org/254263002/
[2]: https://codereview.chromium.org/246393004/

[Mike West, 2014-05-03 14:34:01]

And it sat in the try-bot queue long enough that it now doesn't cleanly apply.
I'll rebase and try again on Monday.

[Mike West, 2014-05-05 06:18:25]

The CQ bit was checked by mkwst@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-05 06:19:48]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/mkwst@chromium.org/264713010/30001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-05 13:11:45]

Change committed as 268159