PluginValidationManager.IssueLocality.EXTERNAL,
                        session,
                        pluginArtifact,
                        "Plugin depends on the deprecated Maven 2.x compatibility layer, which will be not supported in Maven 4.x");
            }
        }
    }

	formatMetaVersionV1 = "1"
)

// format.json currently has the format:
// {
//   "version": "1",
//   "format": "XXXXX",
//   "XXXXX": {
//
//   }
// }
// Here "XXXXX" depends on the backend, currently we have "fs" and "xl" implementations.
// formatMetaV1 should be inherited by backend format structs. Please look at format-fs.go
// and format-xl.go for details.

 * probably roll its own.
 * <p>
 * This implementation is backed by Maven Resolver API, supported protocols and transport selection depends on it. If
 * resolver preference regarding transport is altered, it will affect this service as well.
 *
 * @since 4.0.0
 */
@Experimental
@Consumer
public interface TransportProvider extends Service {
    /**

  LazyLogger(Class<?> ownerOfLogger) {
    this.loggerName = ownerOfLogger.getName();
  }

  Logger get() {
    /*
     * We use double-checked locking. We could the try racy single-check idiom, but that would
     * depend on Logger to not contain mutable state.
     *
     * We could use Suppliers.memoizingSupplier here, but I micro-optimized to this implementation

    String getLanguage();

    /**
     * Specifies if the artifact contains java classes and can be added to the classpath.
     * Whether the artifact should be added to the classpath depends on other
     * dependency properties.
     *
     * @return if the artifact can be added to the class path
     *
     * @deprecated A value of {@code true} does not mean that the dependency should

 * annotation implies nothing about the quality or performance of the API in question, only the fact
 * that it is not "API-frozen."
 *
 * <p>It is generally safe for <i>applications</i> to depend on beta APIs, at the cost of some extra
 * work during upgrades. However it is generally inadvisable for <i>libraries</i> (which get
 * included on users' CLASSPATHs, outside the library developers' control) to do so.
 *

 * annotation implies nothing about the quality or performance of the API in question, only the fact
 * that it is not "API-frozen."
 *
 * <p>It is generally safe for <i>applications</i> to depend on beta APIs, at the cost of some extra
 * work during upgrades. However it is generally inadvisable for <i>libraries</i> (which get
 * included on users' CLASSPATHs, outside the library developers' control) to do so.
 *

				if rel.Field.IgnoreMigration {
					continue
				}
				if c := rel.ParseConstraint(); c != nil && c.Schema == dep.Statement.Schema && c.Schema != c.ReferenceSchema {
					dep.Depends = append(dep.Depends, c.ReferenceSchema)
				}

				if rel.Type == schema.HasOne || rel.Type == schema.HasMany {
					beDependedOn[rel.FieldSchema] = true
				}

				if rel.JoinTable != nil {

import warnings

import pytest
from fastapi import APIRouter, Depends, FastAPI, Response
from fastapi.responses import JSONResponse
from fastapi.testclient import TestClient


class ResponseLevel0(JSONResponse):
    media_type = "application/x-level-0"


class ResponseLevel1(JSONResponse):
    media_type = "application/x-level-1"


class ResponseLevel2(JSONResponse):
    media_type = "application/x-level-2"

 * The interface has no instance methods, so the tests focus on
 * value correctness and array integrity.  A tiny Mockito example
 * demonstrates that the interface can be mocked if another class
 * depends on it.
 */
public class WinErrorTest {

    @Nested
    @DisplayName("Constant value checks")
    class ConstantValues {
        @Test
        void successIsZero() {