*
 * <p>Occasionally, an API will return a plain {@code Future} and it will be impossible to change
 * the return type. For this case, we provide a more expensive workaround in {@code
 * JdkFutureAdapters}. However, when possible, it is more efficient and reliable to create a {@code
 * ListenableFuture} directly.
 *
 * @author Sven Mawson
 * @author Nishant Thakkar
 * @since 1.0
 */
/*

   * escaping for code points if required.
   *
   * <p>Note that arrays returned by this method must not be modified once they have been returned.
   * However it is acceptable to return the same array multiple times (even for different input
   * characters).
   *
   * @param cp the Unicode code point to escape

 * but was not itself a public suffix. However, this test is no longer accurate. There are many
 * domains which are both public suffixes and addressable as hosts; {@code "uk.com"} is one example.
 * Using the subset of public suffixes that are {@linkplain #isRegistrySuffix() registry suffixes},
 * one can get a better result, as only a few registry suffixes are addressable. However, the most

   * "should" be nestmates, so a call to MethodHandles.lookup or
   * AtomicReferenceFieldUpdater.newUpdater inside *AtomicHelper "should" have access to
   * AbstractFutureState's private fields. However, our open-source build uses `-source 8 -target
   * 8`, so the class files from that build can't express nestmates. Thus, when those class files

     * hashes (meaning negotiated via NTLM HTTP Authentication) and the other does not they will not be equal. This is
     * technically not correct however the server 8 byte challenge would be required to compute and compare the password
     * hashes but that it not available with this method.
     */
    @Override
    public boolean equals(final Object obj) {

    # o packageBase: (Required)
    #  The base directory of package for generated class.
    #  The class package is 'this property value + detail package value'.
    #  However, detail packages have default value so basically
    #  you only have to specify the property 'packageBase'.
    #  If this property is specified and detail package properties is not specified, 

the vast majority of deployments in any negative way.

> Will an upgrade of an existing MinIO cluster impact the SLA of the cluster or will it even cause downtime?

No, an upgrade should not cause any downtime. However, on the first startup -
since MinIO will attempt to migrate any existing IAM data - the boot process may
take slightly longer, but may not be visibly noticeable. Once the migration has

		return
	}

	// A client may send a certificate chain such that we end up
	// with multiple peer certificates. However, we can only accept
	// a single client certificate. Otherwise, the certificate to
	// policy mapping would be ambiguous.
	// However, we can filter all CA certificates and only check
	// whether they client has sent exactly one (non-CA) leaf certificate.
	const MaxIntermediateCAs = 10

      the Work or Derivative Works thereof, You may choose to offer,
      and charge a fee for, acceptance of support, warranty, indemnity,
      or other liability obligations and/or rights consistent with this
      License. However, in accepting such obligations, You may act only
      on Your own behalf and on Your sole responsibility, not on behalf
      of any other Contributor, and only if You agree to indemnify,

      the Work or Derivative Works thereof, You may choose to offer,
      and charge a fee for, acceptance of support, warranty, indemnity,
      or other liability obligations and/or rights consistent with this
      License. However, in accepting such obligations, You may act only
      on Your own behalf and on Your sole responsibility, not on behalf
      of any other Contributor, and only if You agree to indemnify,