uses: actions/checkout@v5

      - name: Install Old JDK 8
        uses: actions/setup-java@v5
        with:
          distribution: 'zulu'
          java-version: 8.0.242

      - name: Configure JDK
        uses: actions/setup-java@v5
        with:
          distribution: 'zulu'
          java-version: 11

      - name: Configure JDK
        uses: actions/setup-java@v5
        with:

  @StartStop
  private val server = MockWebServer()

  @BeforeEach
  fun setUp() {
    // Default after JDK 14, but we are avoiding tests that assume special setup.
    // System.setProperty("jdk.tls.client.enableSessionTicketExtension", "true")
    // System.setProperty("jdk.tls.server.enableSessionTicketExtension", "true")

    // IllegalStateException: Cannot resume session and session creation is disabled

           * well be a JDK bug.
           */
          || info.getName().contains("TypeTokenTest")
          /*
           * "IllegalAccess tried to access class
           * com.google.common.collect.testing.AbstractIteratorTester from class
           * com.google.common.collect.MultimapsTest"
           *
           * ...when we build with JDK 22 and run under JDK 8.
           */

    // Not supported due to access checks on JDK 9+:
    // java.lang.reflect.InaccessibleObjectException: Unable to make member of class
    // sun.security.ssl.SSLSocketFactoryImpl accessible:  module java.base does not export
    // sun.security.ssl to unnamed module @xxx
    throw UnsupportedOperationException(
      "clientBuilder.sslSocketFactory(SSLSocketFactory) not supported on JDK 8 (>= 252) or JDK 9+",
    )
  }

  @StartStop
  private val server = MockWebServer()

  @BeforeEach
  fun setUp() {
    // Default after JDK 14, but we are avoiding tests that assume special setup.
    // System.setProperty("jdk.tls.client.enableSessionTicketExtension", "true")
    // System.setProperty("jdk.tls.server.enableSessionTicketExtension", "true")

    platform.assumeJdk9()
  }

  @Test
  fun testTlsv13Works() {

        "org.eclipse.jetty:jetty-client"
      ],
      "allowedVersions": "<10.0",
      "description": "JDK 11 requirement"
    },
    {
      "matchPackageNames": [
        "org.junit-pioneer:junit-pioneer"
      ],
      "allowedVersions": "<2.0.0",
      "description": "JDK 11 requirement"
    }
  ]

      call.execute()
    }.also { expected ->
      when (expected) {
        is SSLHandshakeException -> {
          // JDK 11+
        }
        is SSLException -> {
          // javax.net.ssl.SSLException: readRecord
        }
        is SocketException -> {
          // Conscrypt, JDK 8 (>= 292), JDK 9
        }
        else -> {
          assertThat(expected.message).isEqualTo("exhausted all routes")
        }

   * {@link java.util.Collections#checkedCollection(java.util.Collection, Class)} can suppress it
   * with {@code FeatureSpecificTestSuiteBuilder.suppressing()} until <a
   * href="https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-6409434">JDK-6409434</a> is fixed. It's unclear
   * whether nulls were to be permitted or forbidden, but presumably the eventual fix will be to

   * {@link java.util.Collections#checkedCollection(java.util.Collection, Class)} can suppress it
   * with {@code FeatureSpecificTestSuiteBuilder.suppressing()} until <a
   * href="https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-6409434">JDK-6409434</a> is fixed. It's unclear
   * whether nulls were to be permitted or forbidden, but presumably the eventual fix will be to

         * created TypeVariable will not interoperate with any JDK TypeVariable. But this is OK: We
         * don't _want_ our new TypeVariable to be equal to the JDK TypeVariable because it has
         * _different bounds_ than the JDK TypeVariable. And it wouldn't make sense for our new
         * TypeVariable to be equal to any _other_ JDK TypeVariable, either, because any other JDK