[New Tab Page] Add Field Trial support to the Local NTP

[New Tab Page] Add Field Trial support to the Local NTP

This will allow development of the new design in parallel with the current implementation. The plan is to put new styles in local-ntp.css, which will be selected according to the class of the containing div.

This CL also adds a command-line flag, which will be tied to the Field trial from the server.

BUG=399388
TEST=using force-fieldtrials, confirmed that it works.

Committed: https://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=287131

[Mathieu, 2014-07-31 18:51:29]

Hi Jered, 

Small CL, please have a look :)

[Jered, 2014-08-01 15:23:06]

This approach seems ok but please see my comment...

https://codereview.chromium.org/435723002/diff/1/chrome/browser/about_flags.cc
File chrome/browser/about_flags.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/435723002/diff/1/chrome/browser/about_flags.c...
chrome/browser/about_flags.cc:873: "enable-new-ntp-design",
I once worked on a research project that had an old version and a new version.
Time advanced, and then there was another version, which we called the new new
version. But then people got confused about the new version versus the new new
version, so we started calling it the old new version. Unfortunately that was
confused with the old version, so we started calling it the old old version.
Then we had the (old) old version, the (old) new version, and the new new
version.

Since that project, I have never liked using "new" in a version name. Can we
choose another word? ;-)

[Mathieu, 2014-08-01 16:14:06]

Thanks!

https://codereview.chromium.org/435723002/diff/1/chrome/browser/about_flags.cc
File chrome/browser/about_flags.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/435723002/diff/1/chrome/browser/about_flags.c...
chrome/browser/about_flags.cc:873: "enable-new-ntp-design",
On 2014/08/01 15:23:06, Jered wrote:
> I once worked on a research project that had an old version and a new version.
> Time advanced, and then there was another version, which we called the new new
> version. But then people got confused about the new version versus the new new
> version, so we started calling it the old new version. Unfortunately that was
> confused with the old version, so we started calling it the old old version.
> Then we had the (old) old version, the (old) new version, and the new new
> version.
> 
> Since that project, I have never liked using "new" in a version name. Can we
> choose another word? ;-)

Nice story and good point (reminds me of the team working on the nnnnNTP). I
picked Material Design (let's just call a cat, a cat).

[Jered, 2014-08-01 16:17:49]

On 2014/08/01 16:14:06, Mathieu Perreault wrote:
> Thanks!
> 
> https://codereview.chromium.org/435723002/diff/1/chrome/browser/about_flags.cc
> File chrome/browser/about_flags.cc (right):
> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/435723002/diff/1/chrome/browser/about_flags.c...
> chrome/browser/about_flags.cc:873: "enable-new-ntp-design",
> On 2014/08/01 15:23:06, Jered wrote:
> > I once worked on a research project that had an old version and a new
version.
> > Time advanced, and then there was another version, which we called the new
new
> > version. But then people got confused about the new version versus the new
new
> > version, so we started calling it the old new version. Unfortunately that
was
> > confused with the old version, so we started calling it the old old version.
> > Then we had the (old) old version, the (old) new version, and the new new
> > version.
> > 
> > Since that project, I have never liked using "new" in a version name. Can we
> > choose another word? ;-)
> 
> Nice story and good point (reminds me of the team working on the nnnnNTP). I
> picked Material Design (let's just call a cat, a cat).

lgtm

Please remember that this page is also shown to users whose dsp doesn't provide
an ntp or when offline.

[Mathieu, 2014-08-01 17:28:26]

On 2014/08/01 16:17:49, Jered wrote:
> On 2014/08/01 16:14:06, Mathieu Perreault wrote:
> > Thanks!
> > 
> >
https://codereview.chromium.org/435723002/diff/1/chrome/browser/about_flags.cc
> > File chrome/browser/about_flags.cc (right):
> > 
> >
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/435723002/diff/1/chrome/browser/about_flags.c...
> > chrome/browser/about_flags.cc:873: "enable-new-ntp-design",
> > On 2014/08/01 15:23:06, Jered wrote:
> > > I once worked on a research project that had an old version and a new
> version.
> > > Time advanced, and then there was another version, which we called the new
> new
> > > version. But then people got confused about the new version versus the new
> new
> > > version, so we started calling it the old new version. Unfortunately that
> was
> > > confused with the old version, so we started calling it the old old
version.
> > > Then we had the (old) old version, the (old) new version, and the new new
> > > version.
> > > 
> > > Since that project, I have never liked using "new" in a version name. Can
we
> > > choose another word? ;-)
> > 
> > Nice story and good point (reminds me of the team working on the nnnnNTP). I
> > picked Material Design (let's just call a cat, a cat).
> 
> lgtm
> 
> Please remember that this page is also shown to users whose dsp doesn't
provide
> an ntp or when offline.

Yes. I will make sure people are aware of the extent of this.

[Mathieu, 2014-08-01 17:29:14]

The CQ bit was checked by mathp@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-08-01 17:32:13]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/mathp@chromium.org/435723002/20001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-08-02 00:29:43]

Change committed as 287131