Adds a snooze button to the sheriff-o-matic ui

Tools/GardeningServer/model/ct-failure-group.html

+<!--
+Copyright 2014 The Chromium Authors. All rights reserved.
+Use of this source code is governed by a BSD-style license that can be
+found in the LICENSE file.
+-->
+
+<script>
+function CTFailureGroup(key, failures, snoozeTime) {
+  this.key = key;
+  this.failures = failures;
+  this.snoozeTime = snoozeTime;
+}
+
+

[ojan, 2014/08/06 04:03:01]

Just one line break

[dstockwell, 2014/08/06 06:55:12]

Done.

+CTFailureGroup.prototype = {

[ojan, 2014/08/06 04:03:01]

For better or worse, we've been using the style where you set each method on the
prototype. I'd be totally open to reconsidering that, but I'd want all our apps
to change to be consistent.

[dstockwell, 2014/08/06 06:55:12]

Done.

+  get isSnoozed() {

[ojan, 2014/08/06 04:03:01]

IMO getters make for confusing code. More importantly, I think polymer might get
confused by getters. It won't properly detect when the value changes, e.g. if
you data-bind isSnoozed and then modify snoozeTime, I'm not sure polymer will
update the bound isSnoozed values. Maybe I'm wrong, maybe polymer handles this
fine.

Instead of this, I'd just change the CTFailureGroup to not store the snoozeTime
and instead just store an isSnoozed value. That does mean you can't dynamically
check the isSnoozed value later, but I think that's OK since we update every 30
seconds.

[dstockwell, 2014/08/06 06:55:13]

Done.

+    return Date.now() < this.snoozeTime;
+  },
+  snoozeUntil: function(time) {
+    // FIXME: Post snooze message to frontend.
+    this.snoozeTime = time;

[ojan, 2014/08/06 04:03:01]

I think it makes sense to implement this incrementally, but we need to store
this somewhere in the short-term since we update every 30 seconds. How about we
store the snooze values as JSON in localStorage? We can use the same JSON format
that we want sheriff-o-matic to serve up. That way this code and
ct-failure-analyzer will just need to be changed to store/get the json off the
server instead of localStorage once we're able to store the data on the server.

[dstockwell, 2014/08/06 06:55:13]

Done.

+    Object.getNotifier(this).notify({

[ojan, 2014/08/06 04:03:01]

Why did you need to do this? This might be working around the issue I mentioned
above about getters.

[dstockwell, 2014/08/06 06:55:13]

Yes, this allows the binding to the getter to be reevaluated.

Removed in favor of just storing isSnoozed.

+      type: 'updated',
+      name: 'isSnoozed',
+    });
+  }
+};
+</script>