[Files.app] Add an unittest of NavigationListModel

[Files.app] Add an unittest of NavigationListModel

This patch adds an unittest framework for JavaScript components. In addition, this also adds an unit test of NavigationListModel using the framework.

BUG=309946
TEST=browser_test passes
R=hashimoto@chromium.org, mtomasz@chromium.org

Committed: https://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=232892

[yoshiki, 2013-10-28 17:25:01]

@mtomasz: PTAL at JS code. Thanks.

[mtomasz, 2013-10-29 07:28:17]

https://codereview.chromium.org/48623002/diff/30001/chrome/browser/chromeos/f...
File chrome/browser/chromeos/file_manager/file_manager_unittests_browsertests.cc
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/48623002/diff/30001/chrome/browser/chromeos/f...
chrome/browser/chromeos/file_manager/file_manager_unittests_browsertests.cc:26:
ASSERT_TRUE(rvh);
This may not return, since in a subroutine. We may need to return. Please double
check.

https://codereview.chromium.org/48623002/diff/30001/chrome/chrome_tests.gypi
File chrome/chrome_tests.gypi (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/48623002/diff/30001/chrome/chrome_tests.gypi#...
chrome/chrome_tests.gypi:1025:
'browser/chromeos/file_manager/file_manager_unittests_browsertests.cc',
Is this naming consistent with webui unit tests (implemented as browser tests?)

https://codereview.chromium.org/48623002/diff/30001/chrome/test/data/file_man...
File chrome/test/data/file_manager/unit_tests/mocks/mock_file_entry.js (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/48623002/diff/30001/chrome/test/data/file_man...
chrome/test/data/file_manager/unit_tests/mocks/mock_file_entry.js:6: * Mock
class for FileEntry.
nit: @constructor is missing

https://codereview.chromium.org/48623002/diff/30001/chrome/test/data/file_man...
File
chrome/test/data/file_manager/unit_tests/mocks/mock_folder_shortcut_data_model.js
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/48623002/diff/30001/chrome/test/data/file_man...
chrome/test/data/file_manager/unit_tests/mocks/mock_folder_shortcut_data_model.js:7:
* @inherits {cr.ui.ArrayDataModel}
nit: @extends

https://codereview.chromium.org/48623002/diff/30001/chrome/test/data/file_man...
chrome/test/data/file_manager/unit_tests/mocks/mock_folder_shortcut_data_model.js:8:
*/
nit: @constructor missing

https://codereview.chromium.org/48623002/diff/30001/chrome/test/data/file_man...
chrome/test/data/file_manager/unit_tests/mocks/mock_folder_shortcut_data_model.js:9:
function MockFolderShortcutDataModel(var_args) {
jsdoc missing for var_args

https://codereview.chromium.org/48623002/diff/30001/chrome/test/data/file_man...
chrome/test/data/file_manager/unit_tests/mocks/mock_folder_shortcut_data_model.js:11:
};
nit: ; is redundant after a function() without an assignment.

https://codereview.chromium.org/48623002/diff/30001/chrome/test/data/file_man...
chrome/test/data/file_manager/unit_tests/mocks/mock_folder_shortcut_data_model.js:14:
__proto__: cr.ui.ArrayDataModel.prototype,
nit: , redundant here

https://codereview.chromium.org/48623002/diff/30001/chrome/test/data/file_man...
File chrome/test/data/file_manager/unit_tests/mocks/mock_volume_manager.js
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/48623002/diff/30001/chrome/test/data/file_man...
chrome/test/data/file_manager/unit_tests/mocks/mock_volume_manager.js:6: * Mock
class for VolumeManager.
@constructor missing

https://codereview.chromium.org/48623002/diff/30001/chrome/test/data/file_man...
chrome/test/data/file_manager/unit_tests/mocks/mock_volume_manager.js:15: };
nit: ; redundant

https://codereview.chromium.org/48623002/diff/30001/chrome/test/data/file_man...
chrome/test/data/file_manager/unit_tests/mocks/mock_volume_manager.js:28: }
nit: ; missing

https://codereview.chromium.org/48623002/diff/30001/chrome/test/data/file_man...
chrome/test/data/file_manager/unit_tests/mocks/mock_volume_manager.js:41: }
ditto

https://codereview.chromium.org/48623002/diff/30001/chrome/test/data/file_man...
chrome/test/data/file_manager/unit_tests/mocks/mock_volume_manager.js:62: }
ditto

https://codereview.chromium.org/48623002/diff/30001/chrome/test/data/file_man...
File chrome/test/data/file_manager/unit_tests/navigation_list_model_unittest.js
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/48623002/diff/30001/chrome/test/data/file_man...
chrome/test/data/file_manager/unit_tests/navigation_list_model_unittest.js:5:
function testModel() {
How are these test cases called?

https://codereview.chromium.org/48623002/diff/30001/chrome/test/data/file_man...
chrome/test/data/file_manager/unit_tests/navigation_list_model_unittest.js:27:
assertEquals('/drive/root/shortcut2', model.item(3).path);
assertEquals -> expectEquals where it is possible to continue without a JS
error.

https://codereview.chromium.org/48623002/diff/30001/chrome/test/data/file_man...
chrome/test/data/file_manager/unit_tests/navigation_list_model_unittest.js:32:
assertEquals('/drive/root/hoge', model.item(2).path);
ditto

https://codereview.chromium.org/48623002/diff/30001/chrome/test/data/file_man...
chrome/test/data/file_manager/unit_tests/navigation_list_model_unittest.js:39:
assertEquals('/drive/root/hoge', model.item(2).path);
ditto here and in other cases

[yoshiki, 2013-10-31 09:07:23]

@mtomasz: PTAL. Thanks.

https://codereview.chromium.org/48623002/diff/30001/chrome/browser/chromeos/f...
File chrome/browser/chromeos/file_manager/file_manager_unittests_browsertests.cc
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/48623002/diff/30001/chrome/browser/chromeos/f...
chrome/browser/chromeos/file_manager/file_manager_unittests_browsertests.cc:26:
ASSERT_TRUE(rvh);
On 2013/10/29 07:28:17, mtomasz wrote:
> This may not return, since in a subroutine. We may need to return. Please
double
> check.

I think is rvh is FALSE, the test immediately finishes with failure. We don't
need to care about it.

(But I'll ask C++-guys to take a look at the C++ code later)

https://codereview.chromium.org/48623002/diff/30001/chrome/chrome_tests.gypi
File chrome/chrome_tests.gypi (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/48623002/diff/30001/chrome/chrome_tests.gypi#...
chrome/chrome_tests.gypi:1025:
'browser/chromeos/file_manager/file_manager_unittests_browsertests.cc',
On 2013/10/29 07:28:17, mtomasz wrote:
> Is this naming consistent with webui unit tests (implemented as browser
tests?)

Yes, it is a test of units (meaning that it is not integrated test) but
implemented as browser tests.

The names of existing tests are not consistent. The names of webui unit tests
are
- cr.ui library: webui_resource_browsertest.cc
- net-internals: net_internals_ui_browsertest.cc

If you have good idea of the name, let me know.

https://codereview.chromium.org/48623002/diff/30001/chrome/test/data/file_man...
File chrome/test/data/file_manager/unit_tests/mocks/mock_file_entry.js (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/48623002/diff/30001/chrome/test/data/file_man...
chrome/test/data/file_manager/unit_tests/mocks/mock_file_entry.js:6: * Mock
class for FileEntry.
On 2013/10/29 07:28:17, mtomasz wrote:
> nit: @constructor is missing

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/48623002/diff/30001/chrome/test/data/file_man...
File
chrome/test/data/file_manager/unit_tests/mocks/mock_folder_shortcut_data_model.js
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/48623002/diff/30001/chrome/test/data/file_man...
chrome/test/data/file_manager/unit_tests/mocks/mock_folder_shortcut_data_model.js:7:
* @inherits {cr.ui.ArrayDataModel}
On 2013/10/29 07:28:17, mtomasz wrote:
> nit: @extends

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/48623002/diff/30001/chrome/test/data/file_man...
chrome/test/data/file_manager/unit_tests/mocks/mock_folder_shortcut_data_model.js:8:
*/
On 2013/10/29 07:28:17, mtomasz wrote:
> nit: @constructor missing

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/48623002/diff/30001/chrome/test/data/file_man...
chrome/test/data/file_manager/unit_tests/mocks/mock_folder_shortcut_data_model.js:9:
function MockFolderShortcutDataModel(var_args) {
On 2013/10/29 07:28:17, mtomasz wrote:
> jsdoc missing for var_args

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/48623002/diff/30001/chrome/test/data/file_man...
chrome/test/data/file_manager/unit_tests/mocks/mock_folder_shortcut_data_model.js:11:
};
On 2013/10/29 07:28:17, mtomasz wrote:
> nit: ; is redundant after a function() without an assignment.

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/48623002/diff/30001/chrome/test/data/file_man...
chrome/test/data/file_manager/unit_tests/mocks/mock_folder_shortcut_data_model.js:14:
__proto__: cr.ui.ArrayDataModel.prototype,
On 2013/10/29 07:28:17, mtomasz wrote:
> nit: , redundant here

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/48623002/diff/30001/chrome/test/data/file_man...
File chrome/test/data/file_manager/unit_tests/mocks/mock_volume_manager.js
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/48623002/diff/30001/chrome/test/data/file_man...
chrome/test/data/file_manager/unit_tests/mocks/mock_volume_manager.js:6: * Mock
class for VolumeManager.
On 2013/10/29 07:28:17, mtomasz wrote:
> @constructor missing

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/48623002/diff/30001/chrome/test/data/file_man...
chrome/test/data/file_manager/unit_tests/mocks/mock_volume_manager.js:15: };
On 2013/10/29 07:28:17, mtomasz wrote:
> nit: ; redundant

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/48623002/diff/30001/chrome/test/data/file_man...
chrome/test/data/file_manager/unit_tests/mocks/mock_volume_manager.js:28: }
On 2013/10/29 07:28:17, mtomasz wrote:
> nit: ; missing

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/48623002/diff/30001/chrome/test/data/file_man...
chrome/test/data/file_manager/unit_tests/mocks/mock_volume_manager.js:41: }
On 2013/10/29 07:28:17, mtomasz wrote:
> ditto

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/48623002/diff/30001/chrome/test/data/file_man...
chrome/test/data/file_manager/unit_tests/mocks/mock_volume_manager.js:62: }
On 2013/10/29 07:28:17, mtomasz wrote:
> ditto

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/48623002/diff/30001/chrome/test/data/file_man...
File chrome/test/data/file_manager/unit_tests/navigation_list_model_unittest.js
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/48623002/diff/30001/chrome/test/data/file_man...
chrome/test/data/file_manager/unit_tests/navigation_list_model_unittest.js:5:
function testModel() {
On 2013/10/29 07:28:17, mtomasz wrote:
> How are these test cases called?

They are called from ui/webui/resources/js/webui_resource_test.js.

https://codereview.chromium.org/48623002/diff/30001/chrome/test/data/file_man...
chrome/test/data/file_manager/unit_tests/navigation_list_model_unittest.js:27:
assertEquals('/drive/root/shortcut2', model.item(3).path);
On 2013/10/29 07:28:17, mtomasz wrote:
> assertEquals -> expectEquals where it is possible to continue without a JS
> error.

This framework (ui/webui/resources/js/webui_resource_test.js) doesn't support
expectXxxx. Let me keep as it is as for now. I'll implement them in another
patch.

[mtomasz, 2013-10-31 09:13:12]

lgtm for js.

https://codereview.chromium.org/48623002/diff/30001/chrome/browser/chromeos/f...
File chrome/browser/chromeos/file_manager/file_manager_unittests_browsertests.cc
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/48623002/diff/30001/chrome/browser/chromeos/f...
chrome/browser/chromeos/file_manager/file_manager_unittests_browsertests.cc:26:
ASSERT_TRUE(rvh);
On 2013/10/31 09:07:23, yoshiki wrote:
> On 2013/10/29 07:28:17, mtomasz wrote:
> > This may not return, since in a subroutine. We may need to return. Please
> double
> > check.
> 
> I think is rvh is FALSE, the test immediately finishes with failure. We don't
> need to care about it.
> 
> (But I'll ask C++-guys to take a look at the C++ code later)

@hashimoto told me about this problem, so you may want to ask him.

https://codereview.chromium.org/48623002/diff/30001/chrome/chrome_tests.gypi
File chrome/chrome_tests.gypi (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/48623002/diff/30001/chrome/chrome_tests.gypi#...
chrome/chrome_tests.gypi:1025:
'browser/chromeos/file_manager/file_manager_unittests_browsertests.cc',
On 2013/10/31 09:07:23, yoshiki wrote:
> On 2013/10/29 07:28:17, mtomasz wrote:
> > Is this naming consistent with webui unit tests (implemented as browser
> tests?)
> 
> Yes, it is a test of units (meaning that it is not integrated test) but
> implemented as browser tests.
> 
> The names of existing tests are not consistent. The names of webui unit tests
> are
> - cr.ui library: webui_resource_browsertest.cc
> - net-internals: net_internals_ui_browsertest.cc
> 
> If you have good idea of the name, let me know.

I see. I don't have a better idea at this moment.

https://codereview.chromium.org/48623002/diff/30001/chrome/test/data/file_man...
File chrome/test/data/file_manager/unit_tests/navigation_list_model_unittest.js
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/48623002/diff/30001/chrome/test/data/file_man...
chrome/test/data/file_manager/unit_tests/navigation_list_model_unittest.js:27:
assertEquals('/drive/root/shortcut2', model.item(3).path);
On 2013/10/31 09:07:23, yoshiki wrote:
> On 2013/10/29 07:28:17, mtomasz wrote:
> > assertEquals -> expectEquals where it is possible to continue without a JS
> > error.
> 
> This framework (ui/webui/resources/js/webui_resource_test.js) doesn't support
> expectXxxx. Let me keep as it is as for now. I'll implement them in another
> patch.

SGTM

[yoshiki, 2013-10-31 11:05:28]

@hashimoto: Could you take a look at the c++ code? Thanks.

https://codereview.chromium.org/48623002/diff/30001/chrome/browser/chromeos/f...
File chrome/browser/chromeos/file_manager/file_manager_unittests_browsertests.cc
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/48623002/diff/30001/chrome/browser/chromeos/f...
chrome/browser/chromeos/file_manager/file_manager_unittests_browsertests.cc:26:
ASSERT_TRUE(rvh);
On 2013/10/31 09:13:12, mtomasz wrote:
> On 2013/10/31 09:07:23, yoshiki wrote:
> > On 2013/10/29 07:28:17, mtomasz wrote:
> > > This may not return, since in a subroutine. We may need to return. Please
> > double
> > > check.
> > 
> > I think is rvh is FALSE, the test immediately finishes with failure. We
don't
> > need to care about it.
> > 
> > (But I'll ask C++-guys to take a look at the C++ code later)
> 
> @hashimoto told me about this problem, so you may want to ask him.

I asked @hashimoto and we only concluded that that @satorux may have better
idea.

[hashimoto, 2013-11-01 08:15:47]

Sorry for being late to respond.
LGTM

https://codereview.chromium.org/48623002/diff/30001/chrome/browser/chromeos/f...
File chrome/browser/chromeos/file_manager/file_manager_unittests_browsertests.cc
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/48623002/diff/30001/chrome/browser/chromeos/f...
chrome/browser/chromeos/file_manager/file_manager_unittests_browsertests.cc:26:
ASSERT_TRUE(rvh);
On 2013/10/31 11:05:29, yoshiki wrote:
> On 2013/10/31 09:13:12, mtomasz wrote:
> > On 2013/10/31 09:07:23, yoshiki wrote:
> > > On 2013/10/29 07:28:17, mtomasz wrote:
> > > > This may not return, since in a subroutine. We may need to return.
Please
> > > double
> > > > check.
> > > 
> > > I think is rvh is FALSE, the test immediately finishes with failure. We
> don't
> > > need to care about it.
> > > 
> > > (But I'll ask C++-guys to take a look at the C++ code later)
> > 
> > @hashimoto told me about this problem, so you may want to ask him.
As long as RunTest() is called at the last of each test, I see no problem in
this code.
If any code follows RunTest(), it might be better to use
ASSERT_NO_FATAL_FAILURE(RunTest(...)).
> 
> I asked @hashimoto and we only concluded that that @satorux may have better
> idea.
Yoshiki, the problem you are mentioning here is about the name of this test,
right?

https://codereview.chromium.org/48623002/diff/210001/chrome/browser/chromeos/...
File chrome/browser/chromeos/file_manager/file_manager_unittests_browsertests.cc
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/48623002/diff/210001/chrome/browser/chromeos/...
chrome/browser/chromeos/file_manager/file_manager_unittests_browsertests.cc:11:
#include "content/public/browser/render_view_host.h"
nit: Perhaps, no need to include this?

https://codereview.chromium.org/48623002/diff/210001/chrome/browser/chromeos/...
chrome/browser/chromeos/file_manager/file_manager_unittests_browsertests.cc:14:
#include "grit/webui_resources.h"
nit: No need to include this?

[yoshiki, 2013-11-04 18:17:19]

As chatted with satorux@, '_jstest.cc' is the better name. We'll use it.

https://codereview.chromium.org/48623002/diff/30001/chrome/browser/chromeos/f...
File chrome/browser/chromeos/file_manager/file_manager_unittests_browsertests.cc
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/48623002/diff/30001/chrome/browser/chromeos/f...
chrome/browser/chromeos/file_manager/file_manager_unittests_browsertests.cc:26:
ASSERT_TRUE(rvh);
On 2013/11/01 08:15:47, hashimoto wrote:
> On 2013/10/31 11:05:29, yoshiki wrote:
> > On 2013/10/31 09:13:12, mtomasz wrote:
> > > On 2013/10/31 09:07:23, yoshiki wrote:
> > > > On 2013/10/29 07:28:17, mtomasz wrote:
> > > > > This may not return, since in a subroutine. We may need to return.
> Please
> > > > double
> > > > > check.
> > > > 
> > > > I think is rvh is FALSE, the test immediately finishes with failure. We
> > don't
> > > > need to care about it.
> > > > 
> > > > (But I'll ask C++-guys to take a look at the C++ code later)
> > > 
> > > @hashimoto told me about this problem, so you may want to ask him.
> As long as RunTest() is called at the last of each test, I see no problem in
> this code.
> If any code follows RunTest(), it might be better to use
> ASSERT_NO_FATAL_FAILURE(RunTest(...)).
> > 
> > I asked @hashimoto and we only concluded that that @satorux may have better
> > idea.
> Yoshiki, the problem you are mentioning here is about the name of this test,
> right?

Sorry, I misunderstood. You're right.

https://codereview.chromium.org/48623002/diff/210001/chrome/browser/chromeos/...
File chrome/browser/chromeos/file_manager/file_manager_unittests_browsertests.cc
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/48623002/diff/210001/chrome/browser/chromeos/...
chrome/browser/chromeos/file_manager/file_manager_unittests_browsertests.cc:11:
#include "content/public/browser/render_view_host.h"
On 2013/11/01 08:15:47, hashimoto wrote:
> nit: Perhaps, no need to include this?

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/48623002/diff/210001/chrome/browser/chromeos/...
chrome/browser/chromeos/file_manager/file_manager_unittests_browsertests.cc:14:
#include "grit/webui_resources.h"
On 2013/11/01 08:15:47, hashimoto wrote:
> nit: No need to include this?

Done.

[yoshiki, 2013-11-04 18:17:19]

As chatted with satorux@, '_jstest.cc' is the better name. We'll use it.

https://codereview.chromium.org/48623002/diff/30001/chrome/browser/chromeos/f...
File chrome/browser/chromeos/file_manager/file_manager_unittests_browsertests.cc
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/48623002/diff/30001/chrome/browser/chromeos/f...
chrome/browser/chromeos/file_manager/file_manager_unittests_browsertests.cc:26:
ASSERT_TRUE(rvh);
On 2013/11/01 08:15:47, hashimoto wrote:
> On 2013/10/31 11:05:29, yoshiki wrote:
> > On 2013/10/31 09:13:12, mtomasz wrote:
> > > On 2013/10/31 09:07:23, yoshiki wrote:
> > > > On 2013/10/29 07:28:17, mtomasz wrote:
> > > > > This may not return, since in a subroutine. We may need to return.
> Please
> > > > double
> > > > > check.
> > > > 
> > > > I think is rvh is FALSE, the test immediately finishes with failure. We
> > don't
> > > > need to care about it.
> > > > 
> > > > (But I'll ask C++-guys to take a look at the C++ code later)
> > > 
> > > @hashimoto told me about this problem, so you may want to ask him.
> As long as RunTest() is called at the last of each test, I see no problem in
> this code.
> If any code follows RunTest(), it might be better to use
> ASSERT_NO_FATAL_FAILURE(RunTest(...)).
> > 
> > I asked @hashimoto and we only concluded that that @satorux may have better
> > idea.
> Yoshiki, the problem you are mentioning here is about the name of this test,
> right?

Sorry, I misunderstood. You're right.

https://codereview.chromium.org/48623002/diff/210001/chrome/browser/chromeos/...
File chrome/browser/chromeos/file_manager/file_manager_unittests_browsertests.cc
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/48623002/diff/210001/chrome/browser/chromeos/...
chrome/browser/chromeos/file_manager/file_manager_unittests_browsertests.cc:11:
#include "content/public/browser/render_view_host.h"
On 2013/11/01 08:15:47, hashimoto wrote:
> nit: Perhaps, no need to include this?

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/48623002/diff/210001/chrome/browser/chromeos/...
chrome/browser/chromeos/file_manager/file_manager_unittests_browsertests.cc:14:
#include "grit/webui_resources.h"
On 2013/11/01 08:15:47, hashimoto wrote:
> nit: No need to include this?

Done.

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2013-11-04 18:20:46]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/yoshiki@chromium.org/48623002/400001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2013-11-04 18:20:49]

Failed to apply patch for
chrome/browser/resources/file_manager/foreground/js/file_manager.js:
While running patch -p1 --forward --force --no-backup-if-mismatch;
  patching file
chrome/browser/resources/file_manager/foreground/js/file_manager.js
  Hunk #1 FAILED at 209.
  1 out of 1 hunk FAILED -- saving rejects to file
chrome/browser/resources/file_manager/foreground/js/file_manager.js.rej

Patch:       chrome/browser/resources/file_manager/foreground/js/file_manager.js
Index: chrome/browser/resources/file_manager/foreground/js/file_manager.js
diff --git a/chrome/browser/resources/file_manager/foreground/js/file_manager.js
b/chrome/browser/resources/file_manager/foreground/js/file_manager.js
index
a3bba825bdc50c5048c3eb2e6cf4c8cfd20cee4e..8048a7f070370ebde78ba1311ef868b818b1f977
100644
--- a/chrome/browser/resources/file_manager/foreground/js/file_manager.js
+++ b/chrome/browser/resources/file_manager/foreground/js/file_manager.js
@@ -209,7 +209,14 @@ var BOTTOM_MARGIN_FOR_PREVIEW_PANEL_PX = 52;
     }.bind(this));
 
     // TODO(yoshiki): Remove the flag when the feature is launched.
-    this.enableExperimentalWebstoreIntegration_ = true;
+    this.enableExperimentalWebstoreIntegration_ = false;
+    group.add(function(done) {
+      chrome.commandLinePrivate.hasSwitch(
+          'file-manager-enable-webstore-integration', function(flag) {
+        this.enableExperimentalWebstoreIntegration_ = flag;
+        done();
+      }.bind(this));
+    }.bind(this));
 
     group.run(callback);
   };

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2013-11-05 00:44:20]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/yoshiki@chromium.org/48623002/470001

[yoshiki, 2013-11-05 03:27:01]

Committed patchset #6 manually as r232892 (presubmit successful).