*       thread cleared it, we still know that it's not associated with our thread
     *   <li>If this field's value == null because it was associated with our thread and was
     *       cleared, we know that we're not executing inline any more
     * </ul>
     *
     * All the states where thread != currentThread are identical for our purposes, and so even
     * though it's racy, we don't care which of those values we get, so no need to synchronize.

    could use new flow control capacity before acknowledging it, causing strict HTTP/2 servers to
    fail the call.


## Version 4.1.1

_2019-09-05_

 *  Fix: Don't drop repeated headers when validating cached responses. In our Kotlin upgrade we
    introduced a regression where we iterated the number of unique header names rather than then

        }
        return toReturn;
      }

      @GuardedBy("lock")
      /*
       * The GuardedBy checker warns us that we're not holding cancellationDelegate.lock. But in
       * fact we are holding it because it is the same as this.lock, which we know we are holding,
       * thanks to @GuardedBy above. (cancellationDelegate.lock is initialized to this.lock in the
       * call to `new SupplantableFuture` below.)

		cfg:    cfg,
	}

	// By detecting iptables versions *here* once-for-all we are
	// committing to using the same binary/variant (legacy or nft)
	// within all pods as we do on the host.
	//
	// This should be fine, as the host binaries are all we have to work with here anyway,
	// as we are running within a privileged container - and we don't want to take the time to
	// redetect for each pod anyway.
	//
	// Extreme corner case:

     *
     * ## Upstream
     *
     * In this case the current thread is assigned as the upstream reader. We read bytes from
     * upstream and copy them to both the file and to the buffer. Finally we release the upstream
     * reader lock and return the new bytes.
     *
     * ## The file
     *
     * In this case we copy bytes from the file to the [sink].
     *
     * ## The buffer
     *

		if !HasPrefix(o.Marker, o.Prefix) {
			return entries, io.EOF
		}
	}

	// With max keys of zero we have reached eof, return right here.
	if o.Limit == 0 {
		return entries, io.EOF
	}

	// For delimiter and prefix as '/' we do not list anything at all
	// along // with the prefix. On a flat namespace with 'prefix'
	// as '/' we don't have any entries, since all the keys are
	// of form 'keyName/...'

described the dependencies of the plugin.

We are looking at using Mercury for the resolution and retrieval of the plugin dependencies so during development we would translate the POMs into dependency information that Mercury can understand, and in production we would have the pre-digested format that Mercury could utilize to resolve and retrieve dependencies. We need to be careful that we are using Mercury during development and production so that we don’t get in the situation where Maven 2.x is...

   * cost as fresh ones (1/QPS is the cost for each). We use this trick later.
   *
   * If we pick a function that goes /below/ that horizontal line, it means that we reduce the area
   * of the function, thus time. Thus, the RateLimiter becomes /faster/ after a period of
   * underutilization. If, on the other hand, we pick a function that goes /above/ that horizontal

                   If we're building with JDK8, then clearly we're sticking to
                   JDK8 APIs. However, I assume (but did not confirm) that we'd
                   have the same issue with our -android builds, which need
                   animal-sniffer so that they can check that we're sticking to
                   JDK6-like APIs.

                   So instead, we use javac9, which doesn't lead to this error.

      } finally {
        monitor.leave();
      }
    } else {
      // It is possible due to races that we are currently in the expected state even though we
      // timed out. e.g. if we weren't event able to grab the lock within the timeout we would never
      // even check the guard. I don't think we care too much about this use case but it could lead
      // to a confusing error message.