* version 2.1 of the License, or (at your option) any later version.
 * 
 * This library is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
 * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
 * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the GNU
 * Lesser General Public License for more details.
 * 
 * You should have received a copy of the GNU Lesser General Public

body:
  - type: markdown
    attributes:
      value: >
        Filing feature requests is one of the most popular ways to contribute to Guava.


        Be aware, though: most feature requests are not accepted, even if they're suggested by
        a full-time Guava team member. [Feedback](https://stackoverflow.com/a/4543114) from our
        users indicates that they really appreciate Guava's high power-to-weight ratio. It's

   * there's no way to assign a {@code @Nullable T} to a field {@code T foo;} and instruct the
   * analysis that that means "plain {@code T}" rather than the inferred type {@code @Nullable T}.
   * (Even if supported added {@code @NonNull}, that would not help, since the problem case
   * addressed by this method is the case in which {@code T} has parametric nullness -- and thus its
   * value may be legitimately {@code null}.)
   */

 *       suite()} method with {@code Suppress}. Would {@code FooTest} itself be suppressed, too?
 *   <li>In at least one case, a use of {@code sun.misc.FpUtils}, the test will not even
 *       <i>compile</i> against Android. Now, this might be an artifact of our build system, one
 *       that we could probably work around. Or we could manually strip the test from open-source

 * version 2.1 of the License, or (at your option) any later version.
 * 
 * This library is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
 * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
 * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the GNU
 * Lesser General Public License for more details.
 * 
 * You should have received a copy of the GNU Lesser General Public

 * version 2.1 of the License, or (at your option) any later version.
 * 
 * This library is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
 * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
 * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the GNU
 * Lesser General Public License for more details.
 * 
 * You should have received a copy of the GNU Lesser General Public

 * version 2.1 of the License, or (at your option) any later version.
 * 
 * This library is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
 * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
 * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the GNU
 * Lesser General Public License for more details.
 * 
 * You should have received a copy of the GNU Lesser General Public

 * version 2.1 of the License, or (at your option) any later version.
 * 
 * This library is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
 * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
 * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the GNU
 * Lesser General Public License for more details.
 * 
 * You should have received a copy of the GNU Lesser General Public

 *       suite()} method with {@code Suppress}. Would {@code FooTest} itself be suppressed, too?
 *   <li>In at least one case, a use of {@code sun.misc.FpUtils}, the test will not even
 *       <i>compile</i> against Android. Now, this might be an artifact of our build system, one
 *       that we could probably work around. Or we could manually strip the test from open-source

Pull requests
-------------

Unless the change is a trivial fix such as for a typo, it's generally best to
start by opening a new issue describing the bug or feature you're intending to
fix. Even if you think it's relatively minor, it's helpful to know what people
are working on. And as mentioned above, API changes should be discussed
thoroughly before moving to code.