<module>
<source path="">
  <!-- Hack to keep collect from hiding collect.testing supersource: -->
  <exclude name="**/testing/**"/>
</source>

<!--
    We used to set this only for packages that had manual supersource. That
    worked everywhere that I know of except for one place: when running the GWT
    util.concurrent tests under Guava.

    The problem is that GWT responds poorly to two .gwt.xml files in the same

/**
 * A dummy superclass to support GWT serialization of the element types of an {@link
 * ArrayListMultimap}. The GWT supersource for this class contains a field for each type.
 *
 * <p>For details about this hack, see {@code GwtSerializationDependencies}, which takes the same
 * approach but with a subclass rather than a superclass.
 *
 * <p>TODO(cpovirk): Consider applying this subclass approach to our other types.
 */

<module>
<source path="">
  <!-- Hack to keep collect from hiding collect.testing supersource: -->
  <exclude name="**/testing/**"/>
</source>

<!--
    We used to set this only for packages that had manual supersource. That
    worked everywhere that I know of except for one place: when running the GWT
    util.concurrent tests under Guava.

    The problem is that GWT responds poorly to two .gwt.xml files in the same

<module>
<source path="">
  <!-- Hack to keep collect from hiding collect.testing supersource: -->
  <exclude name="**/testing/**"/>
</source>

<!--
    We used to set this only for packages that had manual supersource. That
    worked everywhere that I know of except for one place: when running the GWT
    util.concurrent tests under Guava.

    The problem is that GWT responds poorly to two .gwt.xml files in the same

/**
 * A dummy superclass to support GWT serialization of the element types of an {@link
 * ArrayListMultimap}. The GWT supersource for this class contains a field for each type.
 *
 * <p>For details about this hack, see {@code GwtSerializationDependencies}, which takes the same
 * approach but with a subclass rather than a superclass.
 *
 * <p>TODO(cpovirk): Consider applying this subclass approach to our other types.
 */

<module>
<source path="">
  <!-- Hack to keep collect from hiding collect.testing supersource: -->
  <exclude name="**/testing/**"/>
</source>

<!--
    We used to set this only for packages that had manual supersource. That
    worked everywhere that I know of except for one place: when running the GWT
    util.concurrent tests under Guava.

    The problem is that GWT responds poorly to two .gwt.xml files in the same

type KubeOptions struct {
	Kubeconfig string
	Context    string
	Namespace  string
}

// Inherit the common kubernetes flags defined in the root package. This is a bit of a hack,
// but it allows us to directly get the final values for each of these flags without needing
// to pass pointers-to-flags through all of the (sub)commands.
func (o *KubeOptions) prepare(ctx cli.Context) {

<module>
<source path="">
  <!-- Hack to keep collect from hiding collect.testing supersource: -->
  <exclude name="**/testing/**"/>
</source>

<!--
    We used to set this only for packages that had manual supersource. That
    worked everywhere that I know of except for one place: when running the GWT
    util.concurrent tests under Guava.

    The problem is that GWT responds poorly to two .gwt.xml files in the same

    @Override
    void render(File htmlReportFile, RichReportData data) {
        super.render(htmlReportFile, enrichReport(data))
    }

    /**
     * This is super-hacky: this report is instantiated via {@code newInstance()}, within a different
     * classloader by {@link JApiCmpWorkerAction}, so there is no way to use a

<module>
<source path="">
  <!-- Hack to keep collect from hiding collect.testing supersource: -->
  <exclude name="**/testing/**"/>
</source>

<!--
    We used to set this only for packages that had manual supersource. That
    worked everywhere that I know of except for one place: when running the GWT
    util.concurrent tests under Guava.

    The problem is that GWT responds poorly to two .gwt.xml files in the same