import org.junit.Ignore;

/**
 * A generic JUnit test which tests {@code set()} operations on a list. Can't be invoked directly;
 * please see {@link com.google.common.collect.testing.ListTestSuiteBuilder}.
 *
 * @author George van den Driessche
 */
@GwtCompatible
@Ignore("test runners must not instantiate and run this directly, only via suites we build")
// @Ignore affects the Android test runner, which respects JUnit 4 annotations on JUnit 3 tests.

       * https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8215328 -> https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8215470
       * https://github.com/google/guava/blob/4f12c5891a7adedbaa1d99fc9f77d8cc4e9da206/guava-tests/test/com/google/common/reflect/TypeResolverTest.java#L201
       */
      info.getName().contains("TypeResolverTest")
          /*
           * And at least one of the classes inside TypeTokenTest ends up with a null value in

          ImmutableList.of(2, 4),
          ImmutableList.of(1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9));

  /*
   * We have a whole series of abstract test classes that "stack", so e.g. the tests for filtered
   * NavigableSets inherit the tests for filtered Iterables, Collections, Sets, and SortedSets. The
   * actual implementation tests are further down.
   */

  public abstract static class AbstractFilteredIterableTest<C extends Iterable<Integer>>

                        </goals>
                    </execution>
                    <execution>
                        <id>test-compile</id>
                        <phase>process-test-sources</phase>
                        <goals>
                            <goal>test-compile</goal>
                        </goals>
                    </execution>
                </executions>
            </plugin>

		},
		{
			etag:              "abcd\"\"",
			canonicalizedETag: "abcd",
		},
	}
	for _, test := range testCases {
		etag := canonicalizeETag(test.etag)
		if test.canonicalizedETag != etag {
			t.Fatalf("Expected %s , got %s", test.canonicalizedETag, etag)
		}
	}
}

// Tests - CheckPreconditions()
func TestCheckPreconditions(t *testing.T) {

import org.junit.Ignore;

/**
 * A generic JUnit test which tests {@code iterator} operations on a collection. Can't be invoked
 * directly; please see {@link com.google.common.collect.testing.CollectionTestSuiteBuilder}.
 *
 * @author Chris Povirk
 */
@GwtCompatible
@Ignore("test runners must not instantiate and run this directly, only via suites we build")
// @Ignore affects the Android test runner, which respects JUnit 4 annotations on JUnit 3 tests.

import org.junit.Ignore;

/**
 * Tests {@link java.util.Collection#equals}.
 *
 * @author George van den Driessche
 */
@GwtCompatible
@Ignore("test runners must not instantiate and run this directly, only via suites we build")
// @Ignore affects the Android test runner, which respects JUnit 4 annotations on JUnit 3 tests.
@SuppressWarnings("JUnit4ClassUsedInJUnit3")

  file:// (which is highly likely to be the case), or the repository is
  not on a local filesystem, deployment will fail when offline.

** Testing mojos

  This can be a problem if the tests are more than simple unit tests;
  that is, if they require configuration of a server process, and
  subsequent testing in-container.

  Since we're only going to concern ourselves with states where localhost is

import org.junit.Ignore;

/**
 * A generic JUnit test which tests {@link Map#compute}. Can't be invoked directly; please see
 * {@link com.google.common.collect.testing.MapTestSuiteBuilder}.
 *
 * @author Louis Wasserman
 */
@GwtCompatible
@Ignore("test runners must not instantiate and run this directly, only via suites we build")
// @Ignore affects the Android test runner, which respects JUnit 4 annotations on JUnit 3 tests.

  }

  // TODO(cpovirk): should we reject null items, since the tests already check null automatically?
  @CanIgnoreReturnValue
  public RelationshipTester<T> addRelatedGroup(Iterable<? extends T> group) {
    groups.add(ImmutableList.copyOf(group));
    return this;
  }

  public void test() {
    for (int groupNumber = 0; groupNumber < groups.size(); groupNumber++) {