Add a Rappor option in the settings page.

Add a Rappor option in the settings page.

BUG=455898
TEST=Check that a RAPPOR option appears in Settings/Advanced/Privacy and control rappor.enable in Local State

Committed: https://crrev.com/ce6a45c39634ba62952a6995991e63a7a886e38c
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#316354}

[Steven Holte, 2015-02-06 00:15:27]

Patchset #3 (id:40001) has been deleted

[Steven Holte, 2015-02-06 00:15:45]

holte@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ asvitkine@chromium.org

[Steven Holte, 2015-02-06 00:15:46]

https://codereview.chromium.org/886523003/diff/20001/chrome/browser/metrics/m...
File chrome/browser/metrics/metrics_services_manager.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/886523003/diff/20001/chrome/browser/metrics/m...
chrome/browser/metrics/metrics_services_manager.cc:93: //bool sb_enabled =
local_state_->GetBoolean(prefs::kSafeBrowsingEnabled);
I'm not actually sure what the correct way to get this setting is, since I get
errors due to the pref not being registered.

Also need to handle propagating enterprise settings on metrics_enabled.

Additional question: Does prefs work for storing this enabled status on
Android/iOS?

[Alexei Svitkine (slow), 2015-02-06 16:43:33]

https://codereview.chromium.org/886523003/diff/20001/chrome/browser/metrics/m...
File chrome/browser/metrics/metrics_services_manager.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/886523003/diff/20001/chrome/browser/metrics/m...
chrome/browser/metrics/metrics_services_manager.cc:93: //bool sb_enabled =
local_state_->GetBoolean(prefs::kSafeBrowsingEnabled);
On 2015/02/06 00:15:46, Steven Holte wrote:
> I'm not actually sure what the correct way to get this setting is, since I get
> errors due to the pref not being registered.
> 
> Also need to handle propagating enterprise settings on metrics_enabled.
> 
> Additional question: Does prefs work for storing this enabled status on
> Android/iOS?

Yes, prefs work everywhere. You need to call RegisterBooleanPref somewhere on
the init path before this call to make it work.

e.g. see MetricsService::RegisterPrefs

[Steven Holte, 2015-02-06 22:23:22]

On 2015/02/06 16:43:33, asvitkine (slow this week) wrote:
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/886523003/diff/20001/chrome/browser/metrics/m...
> File chrome/browser/metrics/metrics_services_manager.cc (right):
> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/886523003/diff/20001/chrome/browser/metrics/m...
> chrome/browser/metrics/metrics_services_manager.cc:93: //bool sb_enabled =
> local_state_->GetBoolean(prefs::kSafeBrowsingEnabled);
> On 2015/02/06 00:15:46, Steven Holte wrote:
> > I'm not actually sure what the correct way to get this setting is, since I
get
> > errors due to the pref not being registered.
> > 
> > Also need to handle propagating enterprise settings on metrics_enabled.
> > 
> > Additional question: Does prefs work for storing this enabled status on
> > Android/iOS?
> 
> Yes, prefs work everywhere. You need to call RegisterBooleanPref somewhere on
> the init path before this call to make it work.
> 
> e.g. see MetricsService::RegisterPrefs

I actually meant checking kSafeBrowsingEnabled.  It looks like it was because
it's in profile not local_state.  Now checking all profiles + UMA for the
default.  Not sure what to do for the enterprise settings yet.  It looks like I
can check for a policy on the UMA setting, or maybe we can update the policy
controls to also control this profile bit.

[Alexei Svitkine (slow), 2015-02-06 22:31:11]

Please add a TEST= line that QA can use to verify this change works as expected.

https://codereview.chromium.org/886523003/diff/60001/chrome/browser/metrics/m...
File chrome/browser/metrics/metrics_services_manager.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/886523003/diff/60001/chrome/browser/metrics/m...
chrome/browser/metrics/metrics_services_manager.cc:113: if
(!local_state_->HasPrefPath(rappor::prefs::kRapporEnabled)) {
Can you add a test for this?

https://codereview.chromium.org/886523003/diff/60001/chrome/browser/metrics/m...
chrome/browser/metrics/metrics_services_manager.cc:155: #else  //
defined(OS_IOS) || defined(OS_ANDROID)
Why is there different logic between mobile and desktop?

https://codereview.chromium.org/886523003/diff/60001/chrome/browser/ui/webui/...
File chrome/browser/ui/webui/options/browser_options_handler.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/886523003/diff/60001/chrome/browser/ui/webui/...
chrome/browser/ui/webui/options/browser_options_handler.cc:569:
l10n_util::GetStringFUTF16(IDS_OPTIONS_ENABLE_RAPPOR, rappor_url));
This should be indented 2 more.

[Steven Holte, 2015-02-06 22:51:46]

https://codereview.chromium.org/886523003/diff/60001/chrome/browser/metrics/m...
File chrome/browser/metrics/metrics_services_manager.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/886523003/diff/60001/chrome/browser/metrics/m...
chrome/browser/metrics/metrics_services_manager.cc:155: #else  //
defined(OS_IOS) || defined(OS_ANDROID)
On 2015/02/06 22:31:11, asvitkine (slow this week) wrote:
> Why is there different logic between mobile and desktop?

Because they have a different settings UI that I haven't added the option to
turn off RAPPOR to yet.  Once that's in I can remove this.  I'll add a TODO.

[Steven Holte, 2015-02-07 02:26:21]

Added a test and a TEST line.

https://codereview.chromium.org/886523003/diff/60001/chrome/browser/metrics/m...
File chrome/browser/metrics/metrics_services_manager.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/886523003/diff/60001/chrome/browser/metrics/m...
chrome/browser/metrics/metrics_services_manager.cc:113: if
(!local_state_->HasPrefPath(rappor::prefs::kRapporEnabled)) {
On 2015/02/06 22:31:11, asvitkine (slow this week) wrote:
> Can you add a test for this?

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/886523003/diff/60001/chrome/browser/ui/webui/...
File chrome/browser/ui/webui/options/browser_options_handler.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/886523003/diff/60001/chrome/browser/ui/webui/...
chrome/browser/ui/webui/options/browser_options_handler.cc:569:
l10n_util::GetStringFUTF16(IDS_OPTIONS_ENABLE_RAPPOR, rappor_url));
On 2015/02/06 22:31:11, asvitkine (slow this week) wrote:
> This should be indented 2 more.

Done.

[Alexei Svitkine (slow), 2015-02-09 16:10:47]

Mostly looks good, just a few comments.

I suggest also posting a screenshot of how the pref looks like on the associated
launch bug, to ensure everyone is on board with it.

https://codereview.chromium.org/886523003/diff/80001/chrome/browser/metrics/m...
File chrome/browser/metrics/metrics_services_manager.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/886523003/diff/80001/chrome/browser/metrics/m...
chrome/browser/metrics/metrics_services_manager.cc:156: if
(IsRapporEnabled(may_record)) {
I think it would be better to make the function return the rappor:RecordingLevel
and move all of these ifdefs into it.

https://codereview.chromium.org/886523003/diff/80001/chrome/browser/metrics/m...
File chrome/browser/metrics/metrics_services_manager_unittest.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/886523003/diff/80001/chrome/browser/metrics/m...
chrome/browser/metrics/metrics_services_manager_unittest.cc:37:
DISALLOW_COPY_AND_ASSIGN(MetricsServicesManagerTest);
This macro should be in the private section.

https://codereview.chromium.org/886523003/diff/80001/chrome/browser/metrics/m...
chrome/browser/metrics/metrics_services_manager_unittest.cc:62:
test_prefs_.ClearPref(rappor::prefs::kRapporEnabled);
If every test starts with these two lines, put them in the harness class, with
the manager being a member. You can expose a getter for it and keep it private.

[Steven Holte, 2015-02-09 20:17:38]

https://codereview.chromium.org/886523003/diff/80001/chrome/browser/metrics/m...
File chrome/browser/metrics/metrics_services_manager.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/886523003/diff/80001/chrome/browser/metrics/m...
chrome/browser/metrics/metrics_services_manager.cc:156: if
(IsRapporEnabled(may_record)) {
On 2015/02/09 16:10:47, Alexei Svitkine wrote:
> I think it would be better to make the function return the
rappor:RecordingLevel
> and move all of these ifdefs into it.

Moved this block to an additional function.

https://codereview.chromium.org/886523003/diff/80001/chrome/browser/metrics/m...
File chrome/browser/metrics/metrics_services_manager_unittest.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/886523003/diff/80001/chrome/browser/metrics/m...
chrome/browser/metrics/metrics_services_manager_unittest.cc:37:
DISALLOW_COPY_AND_ASSIGN(MetricsServicesManagerTest);
On 2015/02/09 16:10:47, Alexei Svitkine wrote:
> This macro should be in the private section.

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/886523003/diff/80001/chrome/browser/metrics/m...
chrome/browser/metrics/metrics_services_manager_unittest.cc:62:
test_prefs_.ClearPref(rappor::prefs::kRapporEnabled);
On 2015/02/09 16:10:47, Alexei Svitkine wrote:
> If every test starts with these two lines, put them in the harness class, with
> the manager being a member. You can expose a getter for it and keep it
private.

Moved MetricsServicesManager to harness.  The ClearPref call is not used in all
of the sets, later ones use SetBoolean here instead.  The ClearPref call is not
technically necessary, since the fresh TestingPrefService shouldn't have a pref
set anyway, but I'm including it for documentation purposes, since the behavior
when this pref has not been set is what is being tested.

[Alexei Svitkine (slow), 2015-02-09 20:42:13]

LGTM

https://codereview.chromium.org/886523003/diff/100001/chrome/browser/metrics/...
File chrome/browser/metrics/metrics_services_manager.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/886523003/diff/100001/chrome/browser/metrics/...
chrome/browser/metrics/metrics_services_manager.cc:125: #if defined(OS_IOS) ||
defined(OS_ANDROID)
Nit: Don't forget to add a TODO here.

https://codereview.chromium.org/886523003/diff/100001/chrome/browser/metrics/...
File chrome/browser/metrics/metrics_services_manager_unittest.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/886523003/diff/100001/chrome/browser/metrics/...
chrome/browser/metrics/metrics_services_manager_unittest.cc:53:
EXPECT_TRUE(test_prefs()->HasPrefPath(rappor::prefs::kRapporEnabled));
Nit: Also check the pref value - for all of these.

[Steven Holte, 2015-02-09 21:06:37]

New patchsets have been uploaded after l-g-t-m from asvitkine@chromium.org

[Steven Holte, 2015-02-09 21:09:22]

holte@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ stevenjb@chromium.org

[Steven Holte, 2015-02-09 21:09:23]

+stevenjb for browser_options

https://codereview.chromium.org/886523003/diff/100001/chrome/browser/metrics/...
File chrome/browser/metrics/metrics_services_manager.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/886523003/diff/100001/chrome/browser/metrics/...
chrome/browser/metrics/metrics_services_manager.cc:125: #if defined(OS_IOS) ||
defined(OS_ANDROID)
On 2015/02/09 20:42:13, Alexei Svitkine wrote:
> Nit: Don't forget to add a TODO here.

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/886523003/diff/100001/chrome/browser/metrics/...
File chrome/browser/metrics/metrics_services_manager_unittest.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/886523003/diff/100001/chrome/browser/metrics/...
chrome/browser/metrics/metrics_services_manager_unittest.cc:53:
EXPECT_TRUE(test_prefs()->HasPrefPath(rappor::prefs::kRapporEnabled));
On 2015/02/09 20:42:13, Alexei Svitkine wrote:
> Nit: Also check the pref value - for all of these.

Done.

[Steven Holte, 2015-02-09 22:14:33]

holte@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ mnissler@chromium.org

[Steven Holte, 2015-02-09 22:14:34]

+mnissler for chrome/browser/policy/configuration_policy_handler_list_factory.cc

[Alexei Svitkine (slow), 2015-02-10 04:59:52]

not lgtm per my comments about UI on:

https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=455898#c15

[Mattias Nissler (ping if slow), 2015-02-10 08:38:15]

https://codereview.chromium.org/886523003/diff/140001/chrome/browser/policy/c...
File chrome/browser/policy/configuration_policy_handler_list_factory.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/886523003/diff/140001/chrome/browser/policy/c...
chrome/browser/policy/configuration_policy_handler_list_factory.cc:125:
base::Value::TYPE_BOOLEAN },
We need to be careful here w.r.t. installations that already have
key::kMetricsReportingEnabled. Given that we have two separate options in
chrome://settings, does it make sense to subsume them both under the same policy
knob?

I assume rappor::prefs::kRapporEnabled toggles RAPPOR entirely? Can you provide
some background on what led to the decision to have to separate pref settings
for metrics reporting and RAPPOR for the consumer experience to help decide and
justify what the enterprise policy behavior should be?

Side note: If we do decide to subsume RAPPOR in kMetricsReportingEnabled, then
you should also update the policy description in
components/policy/resources/policy_templates.json to mention RAPPOR.

[Steven Holte, 2015-02-10 21:10:09]

On 2015/02/10 08:38:15, Mattias Nissler wrote:
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/886523003/diff/140001/chrome/browser/policy/c...
> File chrome/browser/policy/configuration_policy_handler_list_factory.cc
(right):
> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/886523003/diff/140001/chrome/browser/policy/c...
> chrome/browser/policy/configuration_policy_handler_list_factory.cc:125:
> base::Value::TYPE_BOOLEAN },
> We need to be careful here w.r.t. installations that already have
> key::kMetricsReportingEnabled. Given that we have two separate options in
> chrome://settings, does it make sense to subsume them both under the same
policy
> knob?
> 
> I assume rappor::prefs::kRapporEnabled toggles RAPPOR entirely? Can you
provide
> some background on what led to the decision to have to separate pref settings
> for metrics reporting and RAPPOR for the consumer experience to help decide
and
> justify what the enterprise policy behavior should be?
> 
> Side note: If we do decide to subsume RAPPOR in kMetricsReportingEnabled, then
> you should also update the policy description in
> components/policy/resources/policy_templates.json to mention RAPPOR.

asvitkine: Fixed issue with alignment+spacing of settings text by adding the
appropriate CSS classes.

mnissler:  The rationale for a separate RAPPOR setting is that privacy
guarantees make them more suitable for collection by default, but we want to
respect explicit signals we've gotten about the user/enterprises collection
preferences.  I believe merging the enterprise setting to accomplish this was
originally Saswat's suggestion.

Added a quick update to policy_templates.json

[Alexei Svitkine (slow), 2015-02-10 21:12:29]

Can you post the updated screenshot?

On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 4:10 PM, <holte@chromium.org> wrote:

> On 2015/02/10 08:38:15, Mattias Nissler wrote:
>
> https://codereview.chromium.org/886523003/diff/140001/
> chrome/browser/policy/configuration_policy_handler_list_factory.cc
>
>> File chrome/browser/policy/configuration_policy_handler_list_factory.cc
>>
> (right):
>
>
> https://codereview.chromium.org/886523003/diff/140001/
> chrome/browser/policy/configuration_policy_handler_
> list_factory.cc#newcode125
>
>> chrome/browser/policy/configuration_policy_handler_list_factory.cc:125:
>> base::Value::TYPE_BOOLEAN },
>> We need to be careful here w.r.t. installations that already have
>> key::kMetricsReportingEnabled. Given that we have two separate options in
>> chrome://settings, does it make sense to subsume them both under the same
>>
> policy
>
>> knob?
>>
>
>  I assume rappor::prefs::kRapporEnabled toggles RAPPOR entirely? Can you
>>
> provide
>
>> some background on what led to the decision to have to separate pref
>> settings
>> for metrics reporting and RAPPOR for the consumer experience to help
>> decide
>>
> and
>
>> justify what the enterprise policy behavior should be?
>>
>
>  Side note: If we do decide to subsume RAPPOR in kMetricsReportingEnabled,
>> then
>> you should also update the policy description in
>> components/policy/resources/policy_templates.json to mention RAPPOR.
>>
>
> asvitkine: Fixed issue with alignment+spacing of settings text by adding
> the
> appropriate CSS classes.
>
> mnissler:  The rationale for a separate RAPPOR setting is that privacy
> guarantees make them more suitable for collection by default, but we want
> to
> respect explicit signals we've gotten about the user/enterprises collection
> preferences.  I believe merging the enterprise setting to accomplish this
> was
> originally Saswat's suggestion.
>
> Added a quick update to policy_templates.json
>
> https://codereview.chromium.org/886523003/
>

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to chromium-reviews+unsubscribe@chromium.org.

[Alexei Svitkine (slow), 2015-02-10 21:13:46]

LGTM % screenshot

[Steven Holte, 2015-02-10 21:20:58]

On 2015/02/10 21:13:46, Alexei Svitkine wrote:
> LGTM % screenshot

It's attached to the bug:
https://chromium.googlecode.com/issues/attachment?aid=4558980016000&name=rapp...

[Mattias Nissler (ping if slow), 2015-02-10 21:29:08]

mnissler@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ atwilson@chromium.org

[Mattias Nissler (ping if slow), 2015-02-10 21:29:09]

I haven't heard back from saswat, but I've meanwhile pieced together enough
information to convince myself that wiring this up to the existing metrics
policy is the right call.

policy bits LGTM, +atwilson for policy_templates.json changes.

https://codereview.chromium.org/886523003/diff/180001/components/policy/resou...
File components/policy/resources/policy_templates.json (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/886523003/diff/180001/components/policy/resou...
components/policy/resources/policy_templates.json:980: If this policy is left
not set the setting will be what the user chose upon installation / first
run.''',
Is the user actually prompted for RAPPOR on/off during first run?

[Steven Holte, 2015-02-10 21:42:53]

New patchsets have been uploaded after l-g-t-m from
asvitkine@chromium.org,mnissler@chromium.org

[Steven Holte, 2015-02-10 21:44:32]

https://codereview.chromium.org/886523003/diff/180001/components/policy/resou...
File components/policy/resources/policy_templates.json (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/886523003/diff/180001/components/policy/resou...
components/policy/resources/policy_templates.json:980: If this policy is left
not set the setting will be what the user chose upon installation / first
run.''',
On 2015/02/10 21:29:09, Mattias Nissler wrote:
> Is the user actually prompted for RAPPOR on/off during first run?

No, we don't have any first run UI.  Took a stab at rewriting this.

[stevenjb, 2015-02-11 01:25:12]

stevenjb@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ dbeam@chromium.org

[stevenjb, 2015-02-11 01:25:12]

stevenjb@chromium.org changed required reviewers:
+ dbeam@chromium.org

[stevenjb, 2015-02-11 01:25:13]

+dbeam@ for browser_options_handler.cc
Dan - Are there any issues / concerns here with passing a URL to the settings
web ui?

[Thiemo Nagel, 2015-02-11 10:50:50]

tnagel@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ tnagel@chromium.org

[Thiemo Nagel, 2015-02-11 10:50:51]

https://codereview.chromium.org/886523003/diff/200001/chrome/app/generated_re...
File chrome/app/generated_resources.grd (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/886523003/diff/200001/chrome/app/generated_re...
chrome/app/generated_resources.grd:12160: +        Send <ph
name="BEGIN_LINK">&lt;a target="_blank" href="$1"&gt;</ph>RAPPOR<ph
name="END_LINK">&lt;/a&gt;<ex>&lt;/a&gt;</ex></ph> statistics to Google
nit: how about inserting "anonymous" here?

https://codereview.chromium.org/886523003/diff/200001/chrome/browser/metrics/...
File chrome/browser/metrics/metrics_services_manager.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/886523003/diff/200001/chrome/browser/metrics/...
chrome/browser/metrics/metrics_services_manager.cc:39: for (size_t i = 0; i <
profiles.size(); ++i) {
Nit: Suggest to use C++11 range-based loop.

[Steven Holte, 2015-02-11 20:03:32]

https://codereview.chromium.org/886523003/diff/200001/chrome/app/generated_re...
File chrome/app/generated_resources.grd (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/886523003/diff/200001/chrome/app/generated_re...
chrome/app/generated_resources.grd:12160: +        Send <ph
name="BEGIN_LINK">&lt;a target="_blank" href="$1"&gt;</ph>RAPPOR<ph
name="END_LINK">&lt;/a&gt;<ex>&lt;/a&gt;</ex></ph> statistics to Google
On 2015/02/11 10:50:51, Thiemo Nagel wrote:
> nit: how about inserting "anonymous" here?

This was discussed by hodie, battre and others, but it was decided against,
partly because we don't want to imply that other metrics like crash uploads
aren't anonymous.

https://codereview.chromium.org/886523003/diff/200001/chrome/browser/metrics/...
File chrome/browser/metrics/metrics_services_manager.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/886523003/diff/200001/chrome/browser/metrics/...
chrome/browser/metrics/metrics_services_manager.cc:39: for (size_t i = 0; i <
profiles.size(); ++i) {
On 2015/02/11 10:50:51, Thiemo Nagel wrote:
> Nit: Suggest to use C++11 range-based loop.

Done.

[stevenjb, 2015-02-12 18:31:30]

Since dbeam@ is busy, I did a quick look and found precedent for this pattern,
so lgtm.

[Andrew T Wilson (Slow), 2015-02-13 13:14:48]

policy_templates.json lgtm. Not looking at the rest of the CL since mnissler
already LGTMd

[Steven Holte, 2015-02-13 21:00:26]

The CQ bit was checked by holte@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-02-13 21:00:54]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/886523003/220001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-02-13 21:00:57]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-02-13 21:00:59]

All required reviewers (with asterisk prefixes) have not yet approved this CL.

No LGTM from a valid reviewer yet. Only full committers are accepted.
Even if an LGTM may have been provided, it was from a non-committer,
_not_ a full super star committer.
See http://www.chromium.org/getting-involved/become-a-committer
Note that this has nothing to do with OWNERS files.

[Steven Holte, 2015-02-13 22:01:48]

holte@chromium.org changed required reviewers:
- dbeam@chromium.org

[Steven Holte, 2015-02-13 22:02:26]

Removed required reviewer start from dbeam based on stevenjb's review+comment.

[Steven Holte, 2015-02-13 22:02:47]

The CQ bit was checked by holte@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-02-13 22:03:43]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/886523003/220001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-02-13 22:07:21]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-02-13 22:07:22]

Try jobs failed on following builders:
  ios_dbg_simulator on tryserver.chromium.mac (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.mac/builders/ios_dbg_simulator...)
  ios_rel_device_ng on tryserver.chromium.mac (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.mac/builders/ios_rel_device_ng...)
  ios_rel_device_ninja_ng on tryserver.chromium.mac (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.mac/builders/ios_rel_device_ni...)
  mac_chromium_rel_ng on tryserver.chromium.mac (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.mac/builders/mac_chromium_rel_...)

[Steven Holte, 2015-02-13 22:19:56]

New patchsets have been uploaded after l-g-t-m from
stevenjb@chromium.org,atwilson@chromium.org

[Steven Holte, 2015-02-13 22:20:38]

The CQ bit was checked by holte@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-02-13 22:21:49]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/886523003/240001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-02-13 23:20:44]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-02-13 23:20:45]

Try jobs failed on following builders:
  linux_chromium_chromeos_rel_ng on tryserver.chromium.linux (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.linux/builders/linux_chromium_...)

[Steven Holte, 2015-02-14 01:14:45]

The CQ bit was checked by holte@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-02-14 01:15:09]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/886523003/240001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-02-14 01:42:01]

Committed patchset #12 (id:240001)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-02-14 01:43:16]

Patchset 12 (id:??) landed as
https://crrev.com/ce6a45c39634ba62952a6995991e63a7a886e38c
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#316354}

[Steven Holte, 2015-02-19 00:35:10]

Patchset #13 (id:260001) has been deleted