Make CredentialsContainer#get argument options optional to match the spec

Make CredentialsContainer#get argument options optional to match the spec

BUG=701566
Review-Url: https://codereview.chromium.org/2749153005
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#458494}
Committed: https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/90df8ca1bd1aa6218fb937249f38ed59dcaf19a5

[lunalu1, 2017-03-15 21:35:40]

The CQ bit was checked by lunalu@chromium.org to run a CQ dry run

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-03-15 21:36:26]

Dry run: 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, 2017-03-15 23:20:48]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-03-15 23:20:49]

Dry run: Try jobs failed on following builders:
  win_chromium_rel_ng on master.tryserver.chromium.win (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.win/builders/win_chromium_rel_...)

[lunalu1, 2017-03-16 21:49:11]

The CQ bit was checked by lunalu@chromium.org to run a CQ dry run

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-03-16 21:49:45]

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

[lunalu1, 2017-03-16 21:57:46]

lunalu@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ foolip@chromium.org

[lunalu1, 2017-03-16 21:57:47]

Hi Philip, PTAL

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-03-16 23:30:47]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-03-16 23:30:48]

Dry run: Try jobs failed on following builders:
  win_chromium_rel_ng on master.tryserver.chromium.win (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.win/builders/win_chromium_rel_...)

[foolip, 2017-03-21 08:41:29]

foolip@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ mkwst@chromium.org

[foolip, 2017-03-21 08:41:30]

It's probably best if mkwst@ reviews this since the correct behavior with no
argument is not obvious.

[Mike West, 2017-03-21 09:42:11]

Resolving the promise with `undefined` seems like reasonable behavior to me, and
matches the existing spec's algorithm. LGTM.

[lunalu1, 2017-03-21 16:56:10]

On 2017/03/21 09:42:11, Mike West wrote:
> Resolving the promise with `undefined` seems like reasonable behavior to me,
and
> matches the existing spec's algorithm. LGTM.

Does this change require an intent?
If not, I will try to land it today.

[lunalu1, 2017-03-21 17:12:16]

The CQ bit was checked by lunalu@chromium.org

[lunalu1, 2017-03-21 17:12:16]

The patchset sent to the CQ was uploaded after l-g-t-m from mkwst@chromium.org
Link to the patchset: https://codereview.chromium.org/2749153005/#ps40001
(title: "Update credentialmanager/idl.html tests after the idl change")

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-03-21 17:13:10]

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, 2017-03-21 18:55:06]

CQ is committing da patch.

Bot data: {"patchset_id": 40001, "attempt_start_ts": 1490116336258150,
"parent_rev": "c6359868104299cc1eb5fe2700a792d52ecaac6c", "commit_rev":
"90df8ca1bd1aa6218fb937249f38ed59dcaf19a5"}

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-03-21 18:55:53]

Description was changed from

==========
Make CredentialsContainer#get argument options optional to match the spec

BUG=701566
==========

to

==========
Make CredentialsContainer#get argument options optional to match the spec

BUG=701566

Review-Url: https://codereview.chromium.org/2749153005
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#458494}
Committed:
https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/90df8ca1bd1aa6218fb937249f38...
==========

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-03-21 18:55:54]

Committed patchset #3 (id:40001) as
https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/90df8ca1bd1aa6218fb937249f38...

[foolip, 2017-03-22 05:05:29]

On 2017/03/21 16:56:10, loonybear wrote:
> On 2017/03/21 09:42:11, Mike West wrote:
> > Resolving the promise with `undefined` seems like reasonable behavior to me,
> and
> > matches the existing spec's algorithm. LGTM.
> 
> Does this change require an intent?
> If not, I will try to land it today.

Nah, it's a rather small change.