},
        "lithuanian_keywords": {
          "type":       "keyword_marker",

        },
        "lithuanian_keywords": {
          "type":       "keyword_marker",

This can save everyone a lot of time and frustration.

For any non-trivial change, we need to be able to answer these questions:

* Why is this change done? What's the use case?
* For user-facing features, what will the API look like?
* What test cases should it have? What could go wrong?
* How will it roughly be implemented? We'll happily provide code pointers to save you time.

                assertEquals("appendFesenStats should take StringBuilder parameter", 1, method.getParameterCount());
                assertEquals("appendFesenStats should take StringBuilder", StringBuilder.class, method.getParameterTypes()[0]);
                break;
            }
        }

        assertTrue("Should have appendOsStats method", hasAppendOsStats);
        assertTrue("Should have appendProcessStats method", hasAppendProcessStats);

domain object that use plain getters and setters.  It is also not acceptable to add setters that take a Provider.

Note that when adding a lazy property to an existing class, you need to check if instances of the class are instantiated via ObjectFactory. Most classes are instantiated this way, but it's possible that a class without any lazy properties was never updated to use it. A tell-tale sign that an object is not instantiated via the ObjectFactory are direct calls to the constructor...

However, this would limit the ability of the Gradle ecosystem plugin authors to take advantage of new Java features and improvements.

One example is when one of the most popular plugins started requiring Java 17 because the underlying framework behind the plugin began requiring 17, and code from the framework was used in the plugin itself.
What would have happened if Gradle was limited to _only Java 11_ at the time?

## Decision

        assertNotNull(paramAnnotations, "Parameter annotations should exist");
        assertEquals("Should have one parameter", 1, paramAnnotations.length);
        assertEquals("Parameter should have one annotation", 1, paramAnnotations[0].length);

        final UriType annotation = (UriType) paramAnnotations[0][0];

                labelConstantCount++;
            }
        }

        assertEquals("Should have exactly one serialVersionUID", 1, serialVersionUIDCount);
        assertTrue("Should have many label constants", labelConstantCount > 100);
    }

    /**
     * Test that label constant values match their field names
     */
    @Test

        copiedGroups.add("new-group");

        // Verify original is not modified
        assertEquals("Original list should have 1 element", 1, originalGroups.size());
        assertEquals("Copied list should have 2 elements", 2, copiedGroups.size());
    }

    /**
     * Test that processParentGroup handles null user gracefully when depth limit is reached.
     */
    @Test

However, the Java code we have is not fully annotated, which causes several consequences:
* IDE warnings can be misleading
* Redundant null checks may increase binary size, hurt performance, and increase cognitive load for readers
* Missing null checks may cause NullPointerException
* Bridging with Kotlin code is polluted with platform types