Moving webview media permission request to extensions.

Moving media permission request to extensions.

BUG=352293
Committed: https://crrev.com/3be3033c7f76801a5e78ef56aa980e5b4aeee544
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#295469}

[lfg, 2014-09-16 18:57:52]

lfg@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ fsamuel@chromium.org

[Fady Samuel, 2014-09-16 19:02:10]

lgtm

[lfg, 2014-09-16 19:41:50]

lfg@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ rockot@chromium.org

[lfg, 2014-09-16 19:41:51]

Just fixing formatting that I broke in the last patch :(

rockot@chromium.org: Please review changes in 

extensions/*

[lfg, 2014-09-16 19:48:07]

On 2014/09/16 19:41:51, lfg wrote:
> Just fixing formatting that I broke in the last patch :(
> 
> mailto:rockot@chromium.org: Please review changes in 
> 
> extensions/*

Actually, that should be chrome/browser/extensions/*

[Ken Rockot(use gerrit already), 2014-09-17 20:51:40]

lgtm pending resolution of weak ptr question

https://codereview.chromium.org/574793003/diff/20001/extensions/browser/guest...
File extensions/browser/guest_view/web_view/web_view_permission_helper.cc
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/574793003/diff/20001/extensions/browser/guest...
extensions/browser/guest_view/web_view/web_view_permission_helper.cc:189:
base::Unretained(this),
Any reason not to use a weak pointer instead of base::Unretained? I see this
class has a weak ptr factory already.

[lfg, 2014-09-17 23:26:10]

On 2014/09/17 20:51:40, Ken Rockot wrote:
> lgtm pending resolution of weak ptr question
> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/574793003/diff/20001/extensions/browser/guest...
> File extensions/browser/guest_view/web_view/web_view_permission_helper.cc
> (right):
> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/574793003/diff/20001/extensions/browser/guest...
> extensions/browser/guest_view/web_view/web_view_permission_helper.cc:189:
> base::Unretained(this),
> Any reason not to use a weak pointer instead of base::Unretained? I see this
> class has a weak ptr factory already.

Only reason is that I didn't knew how to use it properly ;)

PTAL, I've switched to use a weak pointer, but I also merged with
https://codereview.chromium.org/562263002/ , so I'll wait for that to land
(since it was already on the CQ).

[Ken Rockot(use gerrit already), 2014-09-17 23:35:37]

On 2014/09/17 23:26:10, lfg wrote:
> On 2014/09/17 20:51:40, Ken Rockot wrote:
> > lgtm pending resolution of weak ptr question
> > 
> >
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/574793003/diff/20001/extensions/browser/guest...
> > File extensions/browser/guest_view/web_view/web_view_permission_helper.cc
> > (right):
> > 
> >
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/574793003/diff/20001/extensions/browser/guest...
> > extensions/browser/guest_view/web_view/web_view_permission_helper.cc:189:
> > base::Unretained(this),
> > Any reason not to use a weak pointer instead of base::Unretained? I see this
> > class has a weak ptr factory already.
> 
> Only reason is that I didn't knew how to use it properly ;)
> 
> PTAL, I've switched to use a weak pointer, but I also merged with
> https://codereview.chromium.org/562263002/ , so I'll wait for that to land
> (since it was already on the CQ).

lgtm!

[lfg, 2014-09-18 15:23:54]

The CQ bit was checked by lfg@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-09-18 15:24:27]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/574793003/40001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-09-18 15:47:33]

Committed patchset #3 (id:40001) as 2cbdc5eb4e0a06b6a1fd9a6b6e8692deca458430

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-09-18 15:48:35]

Patchset 3 (id:??) landed as
https://crrev.com/3be3033c7f76801a5e78ef56aa980e5b4aeee544
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#295469}