Fix Auth browser-test failure: make sure element is ready to receive click.

Wait for button to become active before clicking it.

BUG=411143
Committed: https://crrev.com/cdd59ed692e4cba7c5f4df4c5e5f8799c0d88742
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#294092}

[anandc1, 2014-09-05 23:28:14]

anandc@google.com changed reviewers:
+ anandc@google.com, weitaosu@chromium.org

[anandc1, 2014-09-05 23:28:14]

PTAL. Thanks.

[anandc1, 2014-09-08 19:46:36]

Gentle ping on this. Thanks.

[weitao, 2014-09-08 23:07:48]

Ah, sorry. My feedback was ready last Friday but I forgot to send it. So here it
is.

https://codereview.chromium.org/544403002/diff/1/chrome/test/remoting/remote_...
File chrome/test/remoting/remote_desktop_browsertest.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/544403002/diff/1/chrome/test/remoting/remote_...
chrome/test/remoting/remote_desktop_browsertest.cc:312: while
(!IsEnabled("submit_approve_access")) {
You should use a ConditionalWaiter for this. And we should move this to
ClickOnControl so that we don't run into similar issues again.

[anandc1, 2014-09-09 00:59:16]

Thanks Weitao. PTAL at patch-set #2.

https://codereview.chromium.org/544403002/diff/1/chrome/test/remoting/remote_...
File chrome/test/remoting/remote_desktop_browsertest.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/544403002/diff/1/chrome/test/remoting/remote_...
chrome/test/remoting/remote_desktop_browsertest.cc:312: while
(!IsEnabled("submit_approve_access")) {
On 2014/09/08 23:07:48, weitaosu wrote:
> You should use a ConditionalWaiter for this. And we should move this to
> ClickOnControl so that we don't run into similar issues again.

Done.

[anandc1, 2014-09-09 22:33:03]

On 2014/09/09 00:59:16, anandc1 wrote:
> Thanks Weitao. PTAL at patch-set #2.
> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/544403002/diff/1/chrome/test/remoting/remote_...
> File chrome/test/remoting/remote_desktop_browsertest.cc (right):
> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/544403002/diff/1/chrome/test/remoting/remote_...
> chrome/test/remoting/remote_desktop_browsertest.cc:312: while
> (!IsEnabled("submit_approve_access")) {
> On 2014/09/08 23:07:48, weitaosu wrote:
> > You should use a ConditionalWaiter for this. And we should move this to
> > ClickOnControl so that we don't run into similar issues again.
> 
> Done.

Ping. Thanks.

[weitao, 2014-09-09 23:36:38]

https://codereview.chromium.org/544403002/diff/20001/chrome/test/remoting/rem...
File chrome/test/remoting/remote_desktop_browsertest.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/544403002/diff/20001/chrome/test/remoting/rem...
chrome/test/remoting/remote_desktop_browsertest.cc:715: name));
style nit: the last two arguments can fit in the same line (both styles are
acceptable but we normally fit them on the same line in function calls).

https://codereview.chromium.org/544403002/diff/20001/chrome/test/remoting/rem...
chrome/test/remoting/remote_desktop_browsertest.cc:716:
EXPECT_TRUE(waiter.Wait());
This should be a ASSERT_TRUE because the there is no point to continue the test
if this fails.

https://codereview.chromium.org/544403002/diff/20001/chrome/test/remoting/rem...
File chrome/test/remoting/remote_desktop_browsertest.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/544403002/diff/20001/chrome/test/remoting/rem...
chrome/test/remoting/remote_desktop_browsertest.h:320: content::WebContents*
web_contents, std::string name);
const std::string& name

[anandc1, 2014-09-10 00:52:26]

Thanks Weitao. PTAL.

https://codereview.chromium.org/544403002/diff/20001/chrome/test/remoting/rem...
File chrome/test/remoting/remote_desktop_browsertest.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/544403002/diff/20001/chrome/test/remoting/rem...
chrome/test/remoting/remote_desktop_browsertest.cc:715: name));
On 2014/09/09 23:36:37, weitaosu wrote:
> style nit: the last two arguments can fit in the same line (both styles are
> acceptable but we normally fit them on the same line in function calls).

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/544403002/diff/20001/chrome/test/remoting/rem...
chrome/test/remoting/remote_desktop_browsertest.cc:716:
EXPECT_TRUE(waiter.Wait());
On 2014/09/09 23:36:37, weitaosu wrote:
> This should be a ASSERT_TRUE because the there is no point to continue the
test
> if this fails.

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/544403002/diff/20001/chrome/test/remoting/rem...
File chrome/test/remoting/remote_desktop_browsertest.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/544403002/diff/20001/chrome/test/remoting/rem...
chrome/test/remoting/remote_desktop_browsertest.h:320: content::WebContents*
web_contents, std::string name);
On 2014/09/09 23:36:38, weitaosu wrote:
> const std::string& name

Done.

[weitao, 2014-09-10 00:54:01]

On 2014/09/10 00:52:26, anandc1 wrote:
> Thanks Weitao. PTAL.
> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/544403002/diff/20001/chrome/test/remoting/rem...
> File chrome/test/remoting/remote_desktop_browsertest.cc (right):
> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/544403002/diff/20001/chrome/test/remoting/rem...
> chrome/test/remoting/remote_desktop_browsertest.cc:715: name));
> On 2014/09/09 23:36:37, weitaosu wrote:
> > style nit: the last two arguments can fit in the same line (both styles are
> > acceptable but we normally fit them on the same line in function calls).
> 
> Done.
> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/544403002/diff/20001/chrome/test/remoting/rem...
> chrome/test/remoting/remote_desktop_browsertest.cc:716:
> EXPECT_TRUE(waiter.Wait());
> On 2014/09/09 23:36:37, weitaosu wrote:
> > This should be a ASSERT_TRUE because the there is no point to continue the
> test
> > if this fails.
> 
> Done.
> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/544403002/diff/20001/chrome/test/remoting/rem...
> File chrome/test/remoting/remote_desktop_browsertest.h (right):
> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/544403002/diff/20001/chrome/test/remoting/rem...
> chrome/test/remoting/remote_desktop_browsertest.h:320: content::WebContents*
> web_contents, std::string name);
> On 2014/09/09 23:36:38, weitaosu wrote:
> > const std::string& name
> 
> Done.

LGTM

[anandc1, 2014-09-10 00:58:19]

The CQ bit was checked by anandc@google.com

[anandc, 2014-09-10 01:04:51]

The CQ bit was unchecked by anandc@chromium.org

[anandc, 2014-09-10 01:04:51]

The CQ bit was checked by anandc@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-09-10 01:09:34]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/anandc@chromium.org/544403002/40001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-09-10 03:30:58]

Committed patchset #3 (id:40001) as 64873af664ff21ac6b106935d799dcbab97c6d7b

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-09-10 03:58:48]

Patchset 3 (id:??) landed as
https://crrev.com/cdd59ed692e4cba7c5f4df4c5e5f8799c0d88742
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#294092}