Add python coverage module to third_party

Add python coverage module to third_party

Also add a top level Makefile to native_client_sdk which
excersises this.

Add exception to checklicenses.py since upstream does
not include license information in their source files.

BUG=435348, 434551
Committed: https://crrev.com/0cec9d79bb20fa7706eed91c3671ac507ba375e7
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#305439}

[Sam Clegg, 2014-11-15 00:37:19]

sbc@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ phajdan.jr@chromium.org

[Sam Clegg, 2014-11-15 00:37:20]

Hey pawel.  In its current state this CL is failing checklicenses.py because the
individual files dont
have any copyright or license notice in them.

Do I need to pursue upstream to add copyright to each
file?  I notice this module is already check into
the build/third_party folder without any copyright
in them, but maybe the rules are different there?

[Paweł Hajdan Jr., 2014-11-17 10:38:15]

On 2014/11/15 00:37:20, Sam Clegg wrote:
> Hey pawel.  In its current state this CL is failing checklicenses.py because
the
> individual files dont
> have any copyright or license notice in them.
> 
> Do I need to pursue upstream to add copyright to each
> file?

Please notify upstream and ask them to add license headers to individual files,
then you can add an exception with link to upstream bug report.

> I notice this module is already check into
> the build/third_party folder without any copyright
> in them, but maybe the rules are different there?

Yes.

[Sam Clegg, 2014-11-19 00:38:06]

On 2014/11/17 10:38:15, Paweł Hajdan Jr. wrote:
> On 2014/11/15 00:37:20, Sam Clegg wrote:
> > Hey pawel.  In its current state this CL is failing checklicenses.py because
> the
> > individual files dont
> > have any copyright or license notice in them.
> > 
> > Do I need to pursue upstream to add copyright to each
> > file?
> 
> Please notify upstream and ask them to add license headers to individual
files,
> then you can add an exception with link to upstream bug report.

Done.

PTAL.

> 
> > I notice this module is already check into
> > the build/third_party folder without any copyright
> > in them, but maybe the rules are different there?
> 
> Yes.

[Paweł Hajdan Jr., 2014-11-19 11:19:41]

https://codereview.chromium.org/727003004/diff/80001/tools/checklicenses/chec...
File tools/checklicenses/checklicenses.py (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/727003004/diff/80001/tools/checklicenses/chec...
tools/checklicenses/checklicenses.py:302: 'third_party/pycoverage': [ #
http://crbug.com/434551
Please link directly to upstream issue and close the chromium bug.

Copyright notice is NOT NEEDED, this tool only cares about specifying the
license.

FWIW upstream doesn't have to update the copyright notices every year, if they
decide to keep it. Obviously IANAL, just suggesting what we do for Chromium.

https://codereview.chromium.org/727003004/diff/80001/tools/checklicenses/chec...
tools/checklicenses/checklicenses.py:305: 'third_party/pyelftools': [ #
http://crbug.com/222831
Why is this changing?

[Sam Clegg, 2014-11-19 18:49:55]

https://codereview.chromium.org/727003004/diff/80001/tools/checklicenses/chec...
File tools/checklicenses/checklicenses.py (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/727003004/diff/80001/tools/checklicenses/chec...
tools/checklicenses/checklicenses.py:302: 'third_party/pycoverage': [ #
http://crbug.com/434551
On 2014/11/19 11:19:40, Paweł Hajdan Jr. wrote:
> Please link directly to upstream issue and close the chromium bug.

Done.

However I was just following the pattern in the file.  It seems to be a crbug
that is referenced in most the other cases. 

> 
> Copyright notice is NOT NEEDED, this tool only cares about specifying the
> license.

Sure.  I let them decide what to do.

> 
> FWIW upstream doesn't have to update the copyright notices every year, if they
> decide to keep it. Obviously IANAL, just suggesting what we do for Chromium.

Sure.  I let them decide what to do.

https://codereview.chromium.org/727003004/diff/80001/tools/checklicenses/chec...
tools/checklicenses/checklicenses.py:305: 'third_party/pyelftools': [ #
http://crbug.com/222831
On 2014/11/19 11:19:40, Paweł Hajdan Jr. wrote:
> Why is this changing?

The upstream bug link is dead:
https://bitbucket.org/eliben/pyelftools/issue/12

I've added a comment to the crbug about this.

Just tidying up.  I can remove this part of the change if you like.

[Paweł Hajdan Jr., 2014-11-20 10:19:59]

checklicenses change looks good. Please get OSPO and third_party OWNERS review.

https://codereview.chromium.org/727003004/diff/80001/tools/checklicenses/chec...
File tools/checklicenses/checklicenses.py (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/727003004/diff/80001/tools/checklicenses/chec...
tools/checklicenses/checklicenses.py:305: 'third_party/pyelftools': [ #
http://crbug.com/222831
On 2014/11/19 18:49:55, Sam Clegg wrote:
> On 2014/11/19 11:19:40, Paweł Hajdan Jr. wrote:
> > Why is this changing?
> 
> The upstream bug link is dead:
> https://bitbucket.org/eliben/pyelftools/issue/12
> 
> I've added a comment to the crbug about this.
> 
> Just tidying up.  I can remove this part of the change if you like.
> 

Ah, got it. Let's keep your change. Thanks!

[Sam Clegg, 2014-11-20 18:47:26]

sbc@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ cpu@chromium.org

[Sam Clegg, 2014-11-20 18:47:28]

+cpu for third_party OWNERS

[cpu_(ooo_6.6-7.5), 2014-11-20 22:37:51]

Hi, please do

1- create (or mutate existing bug) that states you are adding a new third party
library, what it does and why this one, use that in BUG=

2- follow http://www.chromium.org/developers/adding-3rd-party-libraries

ping me back when ready with 1 and 2

[Sam Clegg, 2014-11-20 23:27:20]

On 2014/11/20 22:37:51, cpu wrote:
> Hi, please do
> 
> 1- create (or mutate existing bug) that states you are adding a new third
party
> library, what it does and why this one, use that in BUG=

Done

> 
> 2- follow http://www.chromium.org/developers/adding-3rd-party-libraries
> 
> ping me back when ready with 1 and 2

I did follow the instructions there.  On going back through I noticed that I was
lacking second owner.  Sorry if I missed something else.

[Sam Clegg, 2014-11-21 02:00:06]

On 2014/11/20 23:27:20, Sam Clegg wrote:
> On 2014/11/20 22:37:51, cpu wrote:
> > Hi, please do
> > 
> > 1- create (or mutate existing bug) that states you are adding a new third
> party
> > library, what it does and why this one, use that in BUG=
> 
> Done
> 
> > 
> > 2- follow http://www.chromium.org/developers/adding-3rd-party-libraries
> > 
> > ping me back when ready with 1 and 2
> 
> I did follow the instructions there.  On going back through I noticed that I
was
> lacking second owner.  Sorry if I missed something else.

Approvals have been granted from open-source-third-party-reviews@google.com and
security@chromium.org BTW.

[cpu_(ooo_6.6-7.5), 2014-11-21 20:46:04]

lgtm

[Sam Clegg, 2014-11-21 21:09:14]

The CQ bit was checked by sbc@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-11-21 21:10:14]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/727003004/120001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-11-21 21:16:32]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-11-21 21:16:34]

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

[Sam Clegg, 2014-11-21 21:58:56]

On 2014/11/20 10:19:59, Paweł Hajdan Jr. wrote:
> checklicenses change looks good. Please get OSPO and third_party OWNERS
review.

Can I get your LG for checklicenses.py?

> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/727003004/diff/80001/tools/checklicenses/chec...
> File tools/checklicenses/checklicenses.py (right):
> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/727003004/diff/80001/tools/checklicenses/chec...
> tools/checklicenses/checklicenses.py:305: 'third_party/pyelftools': [ #
> http://crbug.com/222831
> On 2014/11/19 18:49:55, Sam Clegg wrote:
> > On 2014/11/19 11:19:40, Paweł Hajdan Jr. wrote:
> > > Why is this changing?
> > 
> > The upstream bug link is dead:
> > https://bitbucket.org/eliben/pyelftools/issue/12
> > 
> > I've added a comment to the crbug about this.
> > 
> > Just tidying up.  I can remove this part of the change if you like.
> > 
> 
> Ah, got it. Let's keep your change. Thanks!

[Paweł Hajdan Jr., 2014-11-24 15:25:01]

checklicenses LGTM

[Sam Clegg, 2014-11-24 17:21:26]

The CQ bit was checked by sbc@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-11-24 17:22:38]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/727003004/120001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-11-24 17:25:41]

Committed patchset #7 (id:120001)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-11-24 17:26:26]

Patchset 7 (id:??) landed as
https://crrev.com/0cec9d79bb20fa7706eed91c3671ac507ba375e7
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#305439}