Remove unused user email argument from nss_util.

Remove unused user email argument from nss_util.

BUG=413219
(for trivial refactoring)
TBR=willchan@chromium.org,rsleevi@chromium.org,nkostylev@chromium.org

Committed: https://crrev.com/fa32f2e56ac125ff2c95f35473f123a8d2bc2012
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#294570}

[pneubeck (no reviews), 2014-09-11 12:57:32]

pneubeck@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ mattm@chromium.org

[pneubeck (no reviews), 2014-09-11 12:57:40]

ptal

[pneubeck (no reviews), 2014-09-11 13:00:21]

Patchset #1 (id:1) has been deleted

[mattm, 2014-09-11 21:36:11]

lgtm

[pneubeck (no reviews), 2014-09-12 07:25:29]

The CQ bit was checked by pneubeck@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-09-12 07:25:53]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patchset/560303002/20001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-09-12 07:38:10]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-09-12 07:38:13]

Try jobs failed on following builders:
  chromium_presubmit on tryserver.chromium.linux
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.linux/builders/chromium_presub...)

[pneubeck (no reviews), 2014-09-12 09:33:19]

pneubeck@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ nkostylev@chromium.org, rsleevi@chromium.org, willchan@chromium.org

[pneubeck (no reviews), 2014-09-12 09:33:28]

The CQ bit was checked by pneubeck@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-09-12 09:50:04]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patchset/560303002/20001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-09-12 10:01:54]

Committed patchset #1 (id:20001) as 2483584d589ceeaf507d2f241fb95d10548a55ce

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-09-12 10:07:57]

Patchset 1 (id:??) landed as
https://crrev.com/fa32f2e56ac125ff2c95f35473f123a8d2bc2012
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#294570}

[willchan no longer on Chromium, 2014-09-15 22:46:26]

I consider this debatable as to whether or not it should be acceptable for TBR
(http://www.chromium.org/developers/owners-files#TOC-When-to-use-To-Be-Reviewe...).
It did not appear that burdensome to ask for a review, since it only touched a
few places, rather than a hundred places across the code base. In the future, I
recommend getting a real review.

LGTM.

[Ryan Sleevi, 2014-09-15 23:31:33]

Ditto Will

Ditto LGTM

[pneubeck (no reviews), 2014-09-16 18:19:47]

On 2014/09/15 22:46:26, willchan OOO until 03-22-15 wrote:
> I consider this debatable as to whether or not it should be acceptable for TBR
>
(http://www.chromium.org/developers/owners-files#TOC-When-to-use-To-Be-Reviewe...).
> It did not appear that burdensome to ask for a review, since it only touched a
> few places, rather than a hundred places across the code base. In the future,
I
> recommend getting a real review.
> 
> LGTM.

Thanks Will for speaking out instead of having a silent grunt on me.
Seems that I was a bit too careless in my judgement.
My thought was: "I got a review from Matt, who is one of the few who know this
code, and this refactoring is of mechanical nature. Why burden more people with
additional work?"

Rereading and rethinking the section about LGTM, I see my mistake and will not
repeat it.