[Payments] Record CanMakePayment metrics on Desktop.

[Payments] Record CanMakePayment metrics on Desktop

Plug in the JourneyLogger on the Desktop code and use it
to record CanMakePayment metrics.

BUG=716483
Review-Url: https://codereview.chromium.org/2851893002
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#469447}
Committed: https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/20b49d7b4fb728890b2298345326cb3f1a41f555

[sebsg, 2017-05-01 21:51:35]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-05-01 21:52:36]

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, 2017-05-01 22:36:55]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-05-01 22:36:56]

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_...)

[sebsg, 2017-05-02 14:43:02]

Patchset #1 (id:1) has been deleted

[sebsg, 2017-05-02 19:56:47]

Patchset #1 (id:20001) has been deleted

[sebsg, 2017-05-02 20:25:21]

Patchset #1 (id:40001) has been deleted

[sebsg, 2017-05-02 20:34:08]

Patchset #1 (id:60001) has been deleted

[sebsg, 2017-05-02 20:35:20]

Description was changed from

==========
[Payments] Plug in the JourneyLogger on Desktop.

BUG=716483
==========

to

==========
[Payments] Record CanMakePayment metrics on Desktop

Plug in the JourneyLogger on the Desktop code and use it
to record CanMakePayment metrics.

BUG=716483
==========

[sebsg, 2017-05-02 20:37:53]

sebsg@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ mathp@chromium.org

[sebsg, 2017-05-02 20:37:54]

Hi Math, can you please take a look?

[sebsg, 2017-05-02 20:40:01]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-05-02 20:40:31]

Dry run: CQ is trying da patch.

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

[Mathieu, 2017-05-02 20:56:47]

Seems like some address normalization changes sneaked up in here?

Otherwise looks like a solid change! Some comments

https://codereview.chromium.org/2851893002/diff/80001/chrome/browser/ui/views...
File chrome/browser/ui/views/payments/payment_request_browsertest_base.cc
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2851893002/diff/80001/chrome/browser/ui/views...
chrome/browser/ui/views/payments/payment_request_browsertest_base.cc:86:
https_server_ = base::MakeUnique<net::EmbeddedTestServer>(
should not reinitialize the server everytime we want to navigate. You can keep
86-90 in SetUpOnMainThread

https://codereview.chromium.org/2851893002/diff/80001/chrome/browser/ui/views...
chrome/browser/ui/views/payments/payment_request_browsertest_base.cc:92: GURL
url = https_server()->GetURL(test_file_path_);
this should be |file_path|

https://codereview.chromium.org/2851893002/diff/80001/chrome/browser/ui/views...
chrome/browser/ui/views/payments/payment_request_browsertest_base.cc:93:
ui_test_utils::NavigateToURL(browser(), url);
inline https_server()->GetURL(test_file_path_)

https://codereview.chromium.org/2851893002/diff/80001/chrome/browser/ui/views...
File
chrome/browser/ui/views/payments/payment_request_can_make_payment_metrics_browsertest.cc
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2851893002/diff/80001/chrome/browser/ui/views...
chrome/browser/ui/views/payments/payment_request_can_make_payment_metrics_browsertest.cc:91:
ASSERT_TRUE(content::ExecuteScript(web_contents, click_buy_button_js));
can inline GetActiveWebContents()

https://codereview.chromium.org/2851893002/diff/80001/chrome/browser/ui/views...
chrome/browser/ui/views/payments/payment_request_can_make_payment_metrics_browsertest.cc:151:
OpenPaymentMethodScreen();
this is removed in a change currently in review from Anthony

https://codereview.chromium.org/2851893002/diff/80001/chrome/browser/ui/views...
chrome/browser/ui/views/payments/payment_request_can_make_payment_metrics_browsertest.cc:194:
ASSERT_TRUE(content::ExecuteScript(web_contents, click_buy_button_js));
GetActiveWebContents()

https://codereview.chromium.org/2851893002/diff/80001/chrome/browser/ui/views...
chrome/browser/ui/views/payments/payment_request_can_make_payment_metrics_browsertest.cc:209:
Called_False_Shown_UserAborted) {
can you have a case where the user navigates away while the dialog is showing

https://codereview.chromium.org/2851893002/diff/80001/components/payments/con...
File components/payments/content/payment_request.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2851893002/diff/80001/components/payments/con...
components/payments/content/payment_request.cc:157:
journey_logger_.SetCanMakePaymentValue(state()->CanMakePayment());
I think we should log the value that is sent back to the merchant, which takes
into account the incognito state. What do you think?

https://codereview.chromium.org/2851893002/diff/80001/components/payments/con...
components/payments/content/payment_request.cc:202:
JourneyLogger::COMPLETION_STATUS_OTHER_ABORTED);
This method can get called because of many reasons, some of them positive (for
example, as a result of line 146). Therefore, I don't think this call is right.
Let me know if you need more details about when this might be called.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2851893002/diff/80001/components/payments/cor...
File components/payments/core/autofill_payment_instrument_unittest.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2851893002/diff/80001/components/payments/cor...
components/payments/core/autofill_payment_instrument_unittest.cc:226:
delegate.DelayFullCardRequestCompletion();
is this part of another change?

https://codereview.chromium.org/2851893002/diff/80001/components/payments/cor...
File components/payments/core/journey_logger.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2851893002/diff/80001/components/payments/cor...
components/payments/core/journey_logger.cc:117: // TODO: This should be a DCHECK
once we make sure it's not called twice.
Making it a DCHECK now seems reasonable?

https://codereview.chromium.org/2851893002/diff/80001/components/payments/cor...
File components/payments/core/journey_logger.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2851893002/diff/80001/components/payments/cor...
components/payments/core/journey_logger.h:173: bool has_recorded_;
can also do = false here

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-05-02 21:16:29]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-05-02 21:16:30]

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_...)

[sebsg, 2017-05-02 22:15:08]

Thanks, another look?

https://codereview.chromium.org/2851893002/diff/80001/chrome/browser/ui/views...
File chrome/browser/ui/views/payments/payment_request_browsertest_base.cc
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2851893002/diff/80001/chrome/browser/ui/views...
chrome/browser/ui/views/payments/payment_request_browsertest_base.cc:86:
https_server_ = base::MakeUnique<net::EmbeddedTestServer>(
On 2017/05/02 20:56:46, Mathieu wrote:
> should not reinitialize the server everytime we want to navigate. You can keep
> 86-90 in SetUpOnMainThread

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2851893002/diff/80001/chrome/browser/ui/views...
chrome/browser/ui/views/payments/payment_request_browsertest_base.cc:92: GURL
url = https_server()->GetURL(test_file_path_);
On 2017/05/02 20:56:47, Mathieu wrote:
> this should be |file_path|

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2851893002/diff/80001/chrome/browser/ui/views...
chrome/browser/ui/views/payments/payment_request_browsertest_base.cc:93:
ui_test_utils::NavigateToURL(browser(), url);
On 2017/05/02 20:56:47, Mathieu wrote:
> inline https_server()->GetURL(test_file_path_)

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2851893002/diff/80001/chrome/browser/ui/views...
File
chrome/browser/ui/views/payments/payment_request_can_make_payment_metrics_browsertest.cc
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2851893002/diff/80001/chrome/browser/ui/views...
chrome/browser/ui/views/payments/payment_request_can_make_payment_metrics_browsertest.cc:91:
ASSERT_TRUE(content::ExecuteScript(web_contents, click_buy_button_js));
On 2017/05/02 20:56:47, Mathieu wrote:
> can inline GetActiveWebContents()

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2851893002/diff/80001/chrome/browser/ui/views...
chrome/browser/ui/views/payments/payment_request_can_make_payment_metrics_browsertest.cc:151:
OpenPaymentMethodScreen();
On 2017/05/02 20:56:47, Mathieu wrote:
> this is removed in a change currently in review from Anthony

Thanks for the heads up!

https://codereview.chromium.org/2851893002/diff/80001/chrome/browser/ui/views...
chrome/browser/ui/views/payments/payment_request_can_make_payment_metrics_browsertest.cc:194:
ASSERT_TRUE(content::ExecuteScript(web_contents, click_buy_button_js));
On 2017/05/02 20:56:47, Mathieu wrote:
> GetActiveWebContents()

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2851893002/diff/80001/chrome/browser/ui/views...
chrome/browser/ui/views/payments/payment_request_can_make_payment_metrics_browsertest.cc:209:
Called_False_Shown_UserAborted) {
On 2017/05/02 20:56:47, Mathieu wrote:
> can you have a case where the user navigates away while the dialog is showing

Done. I gives and OtherAbort which is probably not what we want. I opened
crbug.com/717757 to investigate.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2851893002/diff/80001/components/payments/con...
File components/payments/content/payment_request.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2851893002/diff/80001/components/payments/con...
components/payments/content/payment_request.cc:157:
journey_logger_.SetCanMakePaymentValue(state()->CanMakePayment());
On 2017/05/02 20:56:47, Mathieu wrote:
> I think we should log the value that is sent back to the merchant, which takes
> into account the incognito state. What do you think?

Right, it's more safe if the code changes, but we currently don't log
CanMakePayment metrics if the user is in incognito, so the behavior is the same.
Thanks for checking :)

https://codereview.chromium.org/2851893002/diff/80001/components/payments/con...
components/payments/content/payment_request.cc:202:
JourneyLogger::COMPLETION_STATUS_OTHER_ABORTED);
On 2017/05/02 20:56:47, Mathieu wrote:
> This method can get called because of many reasons, some of them positive (for
> example, as a result of line 146). Therefore, I don't think this call is
right.
> Let me know if you need more details about when this might be called. 

Yeah I would like if you could give me more info. I'm not sure I understand what
can be a positive reason that is not a payment completion. Thanks!

https://codereview.chromium.org/2851893002/diff/80001/components/payments/cor...
File components/payments/core/autofill_payment_instrument_unittest.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2851893002/diff/80001/components/payments/cor...
components/payments/core/autofill_payment_instrument_unittest.cc:226:
delegate.DelayFullCardRequestCompletion();
On 2017/05/02 20:56:47, Mathieu wrote:
> is this part of another change?

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2851893002/diff/80001/components/payments/cor...
File components/payments/core/journey_logger.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2851893002/diff/80001/components/payments/cor...
components/payments/core/journey_logger.cc:117: // TODO: This should be a DCHECK
once we make sure it's not called twice.
On 2017/05/02 20:56:47, Mathieu wrote:
> Making it a DCHECK now seems reasonable?

It's not fixed at the moment, so the DCHECK would be triggered really often.
Updated the TODO with the bug number.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2851893002/diff/80001/components/payments/cor...
File components/payments/core/journey_logger.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2851893002/diff/80001/components/payments/cor...
components/payments/core/journey_logger.h:173: bool has_recorded_;
On 2017/05/02 20:56:47, Mathieu wrote:
> can also do = false here

Done.

[sebsg, 2017-05-02 22:15:13]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-05-02 22:15:42]

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, 2017-05-02 22:54:07]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-05-02 22:54:08]

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_...)

[Mathieu, 2017-05-03 02:22:50]

https://codereview.chromium.org/2851893002/diff/80001/chrome/browser/ui/views...
File
chrome/browser/ui/views/payments/payment_request_can_make_payment_metrics_browsertest.cc
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2851893002/diff/80001/chrome/browser/ui/views...
chrome/browser/ui/views/payments/payment_request_can_make_payment_metrics_browsertest.cc:209:
Called_False_Shown_UserAborted) {
On 2017/05/02 22:15:08, sebsg wrote:
> On 2017/05/02 20:56:47, Mathieu wrote:
> > can you have a case where the user navigates away while the dialog is
showing
> 
> Done. I gives and OtherAbort which is probably not what we want. I opened
> crbug.com/717757 to investigate.

This is because the renderer closed the connection, which can happen for a
variety of reasons (closing a tab, navigating, other tab events). In this case,
OnConnectionTerminated gets called because the renderer closed the Mojo binding.

You should probably not log in OnConnectionTerminated. Or like the TODO in
payment_request.cc suggests, try to get the termination *reason*.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2851893002/diff/80001/components/payments/con...
File components/payments/content/payment_request.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2851893002/diff/80001/components/payments/con...
components/payments/content/payment_request.cc:202:
JourneyLogger::COMPLETION_STATUS_OTHER_ABORTED);
On 2017/05/02 22:15:08, sebsg wrote:
> On 2017/05/02 20:56:47, Mathieu wrote:
> > This method can get called because of many reasons, some of them positive
(for
> > example, as a result of line 146). Therefore, I don't think this call is
> right.
> > Let me know if you need more details about when this might be called. 
> 
> Yeah I would like if you could give me more info. I'm not sure I understand
what
> can be a positive reason that is not a payment completion. Thanks!

Line 33-37 gives a possible way we could know of the reason. But we can't always
assume it's an abort. I would remove this logging statement. It feels wrong
especially since on line 142 we log a different completion status, and we will
still end up on this line.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2851893002/diff/100001/chrome/browser/ui/view...
File chrome/browser/ui/views/payments/payment_request_browsertest_base.cc
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2851893002/diff/100001/chrome/browser/ui/view...
chrome/browser/ui/views/payments/payment_request_browsertest_base.cc:93:
ui_test_utils::NavigateToURL(browser(), https_server()->GetURL(file_path));
can you use NavigateTo in other tests where we were calling NavigateToURL ?

https://codereview.chromium.org/2851893002/diff/100001/chrome/browser/ui/view...
File
chrome/browser/ui/views/payments/payment_request_can_make_payment_metrics_browsertest.cc
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2851893002/diff/100001/chrome/browser/ui/view...
chrome/browser/ui/views/payments/payment_request_can_make_payment_metrics_browsertest.cc:200:
JourneyLogger::COMPLETION_STATUS_OTHER_ABORTED, 1);
Should put a big TODO on this test that it's not the result we would expect

[sebsg, 2017-05-03 17:08:51]

Patchset #3 (id:120001) has been deleted

[sebsg, 2017-05-03 17:10:11]

Thanks, Another look?

https://codereview.chromium.org/2851893002/diff/80001/chrome/browser/ui/views...
File
chrome/browser/ui/views/payments/payment_request_can_make_payment_metrics_browsertest.cc
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2851893002/diff/80001/chrome/browser/ui/views...
chrome/browser/ui/views/payments/payment_request_can_make_payment_metrics_browsertest.cc:209:
Called_False_Shown_UserAborted) {
On 2017/05/03 02:22:49, Mathieu wrote:
> On 2017/05/02 22:15:08, sebsg wrote:
> > On 2017/05/02 20:56:47, Mathieu wrote:
> > > can you have a case where the user navigates away while the dialog is
> showing
> > 
> > Done. I gives and OtherAbort which is probably not what we want. I opened
> > crbug.com/717757 to investigate.
> 
> This is because the renderer closed the connection, which can happen for a
> variety of reasons (closing a tab, navigating, other tab events). In this
case,
> OnConnectionTerminated gets called because the renderer closed the Mojo
binding.
> 
> You should probably not log in OnConnectionTerminated. Or like the TODO in
> payment_request.cc suggests, try to get the termination *reason*. 

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2851893002/diff/80001/components/payments/con...
File components/payments/content/payment_request.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2851893002/diff/80001/components/payments/con...
components/payments/content/payment_request.cc:202:
JourneyLogger::COMPLETION_STATUS_OTHER_ABORTED);
On 2017/05/03 02:22:49, Mathieu wrote:
> On 2017/05/02 22:15:08, sebsg wrote:
> > On 2017/05/02 20:56:47, Mathieu wrote:
> > > This method can get called because of many reasons, some of them positive
> (for
> > > example, as a result of line 146). Therefore, I don't think this call is
> > right.
> > > Let me know if you need more details about when this might be called. 
> > 
> > Yeah I would like if you could give me more info. I'm not sure I understand
> what
> > can be a positive reason that is not a payment completion. Thanks!
> 
> Line 33-37 gives a possible way we could know of the reason. But we can't
always
> assume it's an abort. I would remove this logging statement. It feels wrong
> especially since on line 142 we log a different completion status, and we will
> still end up on this line. 

Thanks, will look at this right after this CL

https://codereview.chromium.org/2851893002/diff/100001/chrome/browser/ui/view...
File chrome/browser/ui/views/payments/payment_request_browsertest_base.cc
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2851893002/diff/100001/chrome/browser/ui/view...
chrome/browser/ui/views/payments/payment_request_browsertest_base.cc:93:
ui_test_utils::NavigateToURL(browser(), https_server()->GetURL(file_path));
On 2017/05/03 02:22:49, Mathieu wrote:
> can you use NavigateTo in other tests where we were calling NavigateToURL ?

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2851893002/diff/100001/chrome/browser/ui/view...
File
chrome/browser/ui/views/payments/payment_request_can_make_payment_metrics_browsertest.cc
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2851893002/diff/100001/chrome/browser/ui/view...
chrome/browser/ui/views/payments/payment_request_can_make_payment_metrics_browsertest.cc:200:
JourneyLogger::COMPLETION_STATUS_OTHER_ABORTED, 1);
On 2017/05/03 02:22:49, Mathieu wrote:
> Should put a big TODO on this test that it's not the result we would expect

Done.

[sebsg, 2017-05-03 17:10:17]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-05-03 17:11:01]

Dry run: CQ is trying da patch.

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

[Mathieu, 2017-05-03 17:14:35]

lgtm

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-05-03 17:15:09]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-05-03 17:15:10]

Dry run: Try jobs failed on following builders:
  chromeos_daisy_chromium_compile_only_ng on master.tryserver.chromium.linux
(JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.linux/builders/chromeos_daisy_...)
  linux_chromium_asan_rel_ng on master.tryserver.chromium.linux (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.linux/builders/linux_chromium_...)

[sebsg, 2017-05-03 18:38:57]

Patchset #4 (id:160001) has been deleted

[sebsg, 2017-05-03 18:40:41]

The CQ bit was checked by sebsg@chromium.org

[sebsg, 2017-05-03 18:40:42]

The patchset sent to the CQ was uploaded after l-g-t-m from mathp@chromium.org
Link to the patchset: https://codereview.chromium.org/2851893002/#ps180001
(title: "Rebase")

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-05-03 18:41:47]

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, 2017-05-03 19:21:33]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-05-03 19:21:34]

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_...)

[sebsg, 2017-05-04 15:02:06]

Patchset #6 (id:220001) has been deleted

[sebsg, 2017-05-04 15:02:15]

Patchset #5 (id:200001) has been deleted

[sebsg, 2017-05-04 15:02:26]

The CQ bit was checked by sebsg@chromium.org

[sebsg, 2017-05-04 15:02:26]

The patchset sent to the CQ was uploaded after l-g-t-m from mathp@chromium.org
Link to the patchset: https://codereview.chromium.org/2851893002/#ps240001
(title: "Windows fix and rebase fix")

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-05-04 15:02:41]

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, 2017-05-04 15:26:29]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-05-04 15:26:31]

Try jobs failed on following builders:
  android_n5x_swarming_rel on master.tryserver.chromium.android (JOB_FAILED,
https://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.android/builders/android_n5x_...)

[sebsg, 2017-05-04 19:01:18]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-05-04 19:02:16]

Dry run: CQ is trying da patch.

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

[sebsg, 2017-05-04 20:04:43]

Patchset #5 (id:240001) has been deleted

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-05-04 20:13:53]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-05-04 20:13:54]

Dry run: This issue passed the CQ dry run.

[sebsg, 2017-05-04 20:16:56]

The CQ bit was checked by sebsg@chromium.org

[sebsg, 2017-05-04 20:16:56]

The patchset sent to the CQ was uploaded after l-g-t-m from mathp@chromium.org
Link to the patchset: https://codereview.chromium.org/2851893002/#ps260001
(title: "Windows Fix and Rebase Fix")

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-05-04 20:17:29]

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, 2017-05-04 20:23:20]

CQ is committing da patch.

Bot data: {"patchset_id": 260001, "attempt_start_ts": 1493929016296550,
"parent_rev": "6cc2e7d79ebab76b397fd65caafe8536a255cedb", "commit_rev":
"20b49d7b4fb728890b2298345326cb3f1a41f555"}

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-05-04 20:23:46]

Description was changed from

==========
[Payments] Record CanMakePayment metrics on Desktop

Plug in the JourneyLogger on the Desktop code and use it
to record CanMakePayment metrics.

BUG=716483
==========

to

==========
[Payments] Record CanMakePayment metrics on Desktop

Plug in the JourneyLogger on the Desktop code and use it
to record CanMakePayment metrics.

BUG=716483

Review-Url: https://codereview.chromium.org/2851893002
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#469447}
Committed:
https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/20b49d7b4fb728890b2298345326...
==========

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-05-04 20:23:48]

Committed patchset #5 (id:260001) as
https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/20b49d7b4fb728890b2298345326...