* face inherited. If an inherited ACE is added to a parent the Windows
     * ACL editor will rebuild all children ACEs and set this flag accordingly.
     * 
     * @return whether this is an inherited ACE
     */
    boolean isInherited ();


    /**
     * Returns true if this ACE is an allow ACE and false if it is a deny ACE.
     * 

 * and access mask of each ACE. If the SID matches, the allow/deny flags
 * and access mask are considered. If the ACE is a "deny"
 * ACE and <i>any</i> of the desired access bits match bits in the access
 * mask of the ACE, the whole access check fails. If the ACE is an "allow"
 * ACE and <i>all</i> of the bits in the desired access bits match bits in
 * the access mask of the ACE, the access check is successful. Otherwise,

   *
   * <p>A failing {@link TearDown} may or may not fail a tl4j test, depending on the version of
   * JUnit test case you are running under. To avoid failing in the face of an exception regardless
   * of JUnit version, implement a {@link SloppyTearDown} instead.
   *
   * <p>tl4j details: For backwards compatibility, {@code junit3.TearDownTestCase} currently does

 * and access mask of each ACE. If the SID matches, the allow/deny flags
 * and access mask are considered. If the ACE is a "deny"
 * ACE and <i>any</i> of the desired access bits match bits in the access
 * mask of the ACE, the whole access check fails. If the ACE is an "allow"
 * ACE and <i>all</i> of the bits in the desired access bits match bits in
 * the access mask of the ACE, the access check is successful. Otherwise,

        //
        // Note that there is a race condition here which can result in missing
        // a cyclic edge: it's possible for two threads to simultaneous find
        // "safe" edges which together form a cycle. Preventing this race
        // condition efficiently without _introducing_ deadlock is probably
        // tricky. For now, just accept the race condition---missing a warning

   * the iterator is created, in any way except through the iterator's own remove method, the
   * iterator will generally throw a {@link ConcurrentModificationException}. Thus, in the face of
   * concurrent modification, the iterator fails quickly and cleanly, rather than risking arbitrary,
   * non-deterministic behavior at an undetermined time in the future.
   *

            requests.add(new MetadataRequest(metadata, null, REPOSITORY_CONTEXT).setTrace(trace));

            for (RemoteRepository repository : request.getRepositories()) {
                requests.add(new MetadataRequest(metadata, repository, REPOSITORY_CONTEXT).setTrace(trace));
            }
        }

        // initial try, use locally cached metadata

        for ( Entry<String, Map<String, CacheEntry<DfsReferralDataInternal>>> entry : domains.entrySet() ) {
            log.trace("Domain " + entry.getKey());
            for ( Entry<String, CacheEntry<DfsReferralDataInternal>> entry2 : entry.getValue().entrySet() ) {
                log.trace("  Root " + entry2.getKey());
                if ( entry2.getValue().map != null ) {

            RequestTrace trace,
            RepositorySystem resolver,
            RemoteRepositoryManager remoteRepositoryManager,
            List<RemoteRepository> repositories,
            ProjectBuildingRequest.RepositoryMerging repositoryMerging,
            ReactorModelPool modelPool,
            Map<String, Object> parentCache) {
        this.session = session;
        this.trace = trace;
        this.resolver = resolver;

        msgs.add("* An aggregator Mojo is already executing in parallel build,    *");
        msgs.add("* but aggregator Mojos require exclusive access to reactor to   *");
        msgs.add("* prevent race conditions. This mojo execution will be blocked  *");
        msgs.add("* until the aggregator work is done.                            *");
        msgs.add("*****************************************************************");