## Expected Behavior
<!--- If you're describing a bug, tell us what should happen -->
<!--- If you're suggesting a change/improvement, tell us how it should work -->

## Current Behavior
<!--- If describing a bug, tell us what happens instead of the expected behavior -->
<!--- If suggesting a change/improvement, explain the difference from current behavior -->

## Possible Solution

import org.codelibs.fess.suggest.entity.ElevateWord;
import org.opensearch.transport.client.Client;

/**
 * The ElevateWordSettings class manages the settings for elevate words in the suggestion system.
 * It provides methods to retrieve, add, and delete elevate words from the settings.
 *
 * <p>Constants:</p>
 * <ul>
 *   <li>{@code ELEVATE_WORD_SETTINGD_KEY} - The key for elevate word settings.</li>

 * governing permissions and limitations under the License.
 */
package org.codelibs.fess.suggest.exception;

/**
 * Exception thrown when there is an issue with the suggestion index.
 * This exception extends {@link SuggesterException}.
 *
 * <p>This exception can be thrown with a message, a cause, or both.</p>
 *
 * <pre>
 * Example usage:

     */
    public SuggestRequestBuilder addKind(final String kind) {
        request.addKind(kind);
        return this;
    }

    /**
     * Sets whether to return detailed suggestion information.
     * @param suggestDetail True to return detailed information, false otherwise.
     * @return This builder instance.
     */
    public SuggestRequestBuilder setSuggestDetail(final boolean suggestDetail) {

     * comment: Seed value for popular word suggestion.
     * @return The value of found property. (NotNull: if not found, exception but basically no way)
     */
    String getSuggestPopularWordSeed();

    /**
     * Get the value for the key 'suggest.popular.word.seed' as {@link Integer}. <br>
     * The value is, e.g. 0 <br>
     * comment: Seed value for popular word suggestion.

        method signatures would look like, for example, even if the method and class names are still
        in flux. This can make the feature you're suggesting much clearer to us.

  - type: textarea
    attributes:
      label: (Optional) What would the method signatures for your feature look like?
      placeholder: |
        e.g.,

Then we **assign those two values** of the tuple to the variables `id` and `name`.

So, if the user didn't provide an item ID, they will still receive a random suggestion.

...we do all this in a **single simple line**. 🤯 Don't you love Python? 🐍

{* ../../docs_src/query_params_str_validations/tutorial015_an_py310.py ln[22:30] hl[29] *}

## Recap { #recap }

The most common is the implicit flow.

The most secure is the code flow, but it's more complex to implement as it requires more steps. As it is more complex, many providers end up suggesting the implicit flow.

/// note

It's common that each authentication provider names their flows in a different way, to make it part of their brand.

But in the end, they are implementing the same OAuth2 standard.

// http://www.domaine.km/documents/charte.doc
km
org.km
nom.km
gov.km
prd.km
tm.km
edu.km
mil.km
ass.km
com.km
// These are only mentioned as proposed suggestions at domaine.km, but
// https://www.iana.org/domains/root/db/km.html says they're available for registration:
coop.km
asso.km
presse.km
medecin.km
notaires.km
pharmaciens.km
veterinaire.km

        + "\n\nIn most cases, it's better to make PRs updating that file so that the LLM can do a better job generating the translations than suggesting changes in this PR."
    )
    pr = gh_repo.create_pull(title=message, body=body, base="master", head=branch_name)
    print(f"Created PR: {pr.number}")
    print("Finished")