<!--
      | We may potentially want to export these, but right now I'm not sure that anything Guice specific needs
      | to be made available to plugin authors. If we find people are getting fancy and want to take advantage of
      | Guice specifics we can expose that later. Really some testing needs to be done to see full hiding

          <!-- We add the link ourselves, both so that we can choose Java 9 over the version that -source suggests and so that we can solve the JSR305 problem described below. -->
          <detectJavaApiLink>false</detectJavaApiLink>
          <offlineLinks>

                  </fileset>
                </copy>
                <!-- TODO(cpovirk): If we continue stripping these once we use @ElementTypesAreNonnullByDefault, then we should strip @ElementTypesAreNonnullByDefault, too, to reflect that the classes are *not* fully annotated. But hopefully we can stop stripping them, as https://github.com/jspecify/jspecify/issues/184 should make possible. -->

                <version>2.23.0</version>
              </path>
            </annotationProcessorPaths>
            <!-- Fork:

                 - for JDK8 because we use a javac9 bootclasspath

                 - for JDK9+ because we need args like add-exports
                 -->
            <fork>true</fork>
          </configuration>
        </plugin>
        <plugin>

                <version>2.23.0</version>
              </path>
            </annotationProcessorPaths>
            <!-- Fork:

                 - for JDK8 because we use a javac9 bootclasspath

                 - for JDK9+ because we need args like add-exports
                 -->
            <fork>true</fork>
          </configuration>
        </plugin>
        <plugin>

      <groupId>org.codehaus.plexus</groupId>
      <artifactId>plexus-xml</artifactId>
      <version>${plexusXmlVersion}</version>
      <scope>provided</scope>
      <exclusions>
        <!-- we need the exclusion to be able to release, else we have a cycle -->
        <exclusion>
          <groupId>org.apache.maven</groupId>
          <artifactId>maven-xml-impl</artifactId>
        </exclusion>
      </exclusions>
    </dependency>

  |   what is allowed in the field.
  |
  | o validators: there could be several levels of validation. Simple type validation could
  |   be done with a regex, but we need inter-field validation and rules which could be
  |   dealt with by something like drools.
  |
  | o i18n: would be good to be able to have names/descriptions/specifications

    <suppress checks="InterfaceIsTypeCheck"
              files=".*[/\\]core-api[/\\]src[/\\]main[/\\]java[/\\]org[/\\]gradle[/\\]api[/\\]attributes[/\\]Usage.+"/>

    <!-- We like it explicit -->
    <suppress checks="ExplicitInitializationCheck"
              files=".*"/>

    <!-- Ignore code from maven subproject under org.apache -->
    <suppress checks="RegexpSingleline"

          <!-- We add the link ourselves, both so that we can choose Java 9 over the version that -source suggests and so that we can solve the JSR305 problem described below. -->
          <detectJavaApiLink>false</detectJavaApiLink>
          <offlineLinks>

            <groupId>javax.enterprise</groupId>
            <artifactId>cdi-api</artifactId>
          </exclusion>
          <!-- Detach them: We want to handle Sisu inject and plexus explicitly -->
          <!-- Once have this, once have that on classpath -->
          <!-- Finally, we may want to use some with classifier -->
          <exclusion>
            <groupId>org.eclipse.sisu</groupId>