Remove omnibox watcher.

Remove omnibox watcher.

This is effectively a revert of commit positions 308378 and 307774.

BUG=451173
TBR=bauerb@chromium.org,rogerta@chromium.org

Committed: https://crrev.com/9d291627a0309ab645d1bc9dab4646bf2a9119ac
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#312943}

[grt (UTC plus 2), 2015-01-22 21:33:58]

grt@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ mpearson@chromium.org

[grt (UTC plus 2), 2015-01-22 21:39:13]

Hi Mark. Could you take a look? I'm backing out both changes here. Let me know
if there's a reason to keep r308378. Thanks.

[Mark P, 2015-01-22 22:36:59]

good with one comment

https://codereview.chromium.org/872433003/diff/1/chrome/common/safe_browsing/...
File chrome/common/safe_browsing/csd.proto (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/872433003/diff/1/chrome/common/safe_browsing/...
chrome/common/safe_browsing/csd.proto:374: // Note: skip tag 5 because it was
previously used.
Isn't it better practice to leave the message and this declaration and mark it
as deprecated = true?

[Mark P, 2015-01-22 22:38:19]

https://codereview.chromium.org/872433003/diff/1/chrome/common/safe_browsing/...
File chrome/common/safe_browsing/csd.proto (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/872433003/diff/1/chrome/common/safe_browsing/...
chrome/common/safe_browsing/csd.proto:374: // Note: skip tag 5 because it was
previously used.
On 2015/01/22 22:36:59, Mark P wrote:
> Isn't it better practice to leave the message and this declaration and mark it
> as deprecated = true?

Also, once we settle on the proto changes or lack thereof, shouldn't we update
the server first?

[grt (UTC plus 2), 2015-01-23 16:46:32]

Thanks for the quick review.

https://codereview.chromium.org/872433003/diff/1/chrome/common/safe_browsing/...
File chrome/common/safe_browsing/csd.proto (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/872433003/diff/1/chrome/common/safe_browsing/...
chrome/common/safe_browsing/csd.proto:374: // Note: skip tag 5 because it was
previously used.
On 2015/01/22 22:36:59, Mark P wrote:
> Isn't it better practice to leave the message and this declaration and mark it
> as deprecated = true?

That may be good practice where there's still existing code, but in this case
there will be no Chrome code producing or consuming this particular message. May
as well not carry the weight in the generated code.

https://codereview.chromium.org/872433003/diff/1/chrome/common/safe_browsing/...
chrome/common/safe_browsing/csd.proto:374: // Note: skip tag 5 because it was
previously used.
On 2015/01/22 22:38:18, Mark P wrote:
> On 2015/01/22 22:36:59, Mark P wrote:
> > Isn't it better practice to leave the message and this declaration and mark
it
> > as deprecated = true?
> 
> Also, once we settle on the proto changes or lack thereof, shouldn't we update
> the server first?

We'll keep the message on the back-end. Happy to discuss off-CL.

[Mark P, 2015-01-23 16:55:04]

lgtm

https://codereview.chromium.org/872433003/diff/1/chrome/common/safe_browsing/...
File chrome/common/safe_browsing/csd.proto (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/872433003/diff/1/chrome/common/safe_browsing/...
chrome/common/safe_browsing/csd.proto:374: // Note: skip tag 5 because it was
previously used.
On 2015/01/23 16:46:32, grt wrote:
> On 2015/01/22 22:38:18, Mark P wrote:
> > On 2015/01/22 22:36:59, Mark P wrote:
> > > Isn't it better practice to leave the message and this declaration and
mark
> it
> > > as deprecated = true?
> > 
> > Also, once we settle on the proto changes or lack thereof, shouldn't we
update
> > the server first?
> 
> We'll keep the message on the back-end. Happy to discuss off-CL.

Given that you're keeping the message on the backend, I think this policy of
removing the deprecated message on the frontend sounds fine.

[grt (UTC plus 2), 2015-01-23 17:17:25]

grt@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ noelutz@chromium.org, pkasting@chromium.org

[grt (UTC plus 2), 2015-01-23 17:18:03]

grt@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ bauerb@chromium.org, rogerta@chromium.org

[grt (UTC plus 2), 2015-01-23 17:18:33]

grt@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ noelutz@google.com
- noelutz@chromium.org

[grt (UTC plus 2), 2015-01-23 17:21:55]

Review assignments (same as for the original changes being backed out here):
pkasting: chrome/browser/omnibox/* and chrome/browser/ui/omnibox/*
noelutz: chrome/common/safe_browsing

TBR:
rogerta: chrome/browser/rlz/*
bauberb: chrome/browser/android/*

Thank you, all.

[Bernhard Bauer, 2015-01-23 17:44:21]

Android LGTM

[noelutz, 2015-01-23 18:34:47]

lgtm

[Peter Kasting, 2015-01-23 21:18:24]

LGTM

[grt (UTC plus 2), 2015-01-23 21:33:35]

The CQ bit was checked by grt@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-01-23 21:34:11]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/872433003/1

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-01-23 22:13:24]

Committed patchset #1 (id:1)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-01-23 22:14:54]

Patchset 1 (id:??) landed as
https://crrev.com/9d291627a0309ab645d1bc9dab4646bf2a9119ac
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#312943}