*/
    @Nonnull
    Optional<Boolean> infer();

    /**
     * Should fix Maven 4 compatibility issues in POMs.
     * This includes fixing unsupported combine attributes, duplicate dependencies,
     * unsupported expressions, and other Maven 4 validation issues.
     *
     * @return an {@link Optional} containing the boolean value {@code true} if specified, or empty

 */
package org.apache.maven.lifecycle.internal;

import org.apache.maven.execution.ExecutionEvent;
import org.apache.maven.execution.MavenSession;
import org.apache.maven.plugin.MojoExecution;

/**
 * Assists in firing execution events. <strong>Warning:</strong> This is an internal utility interface that is only
 * public for technical reasons, it is not part of the public API. In particular, this interface can be changed or

<module>
<source path="">
  <!-- Hack to keep collect from hiding collect.testing supersource: -->
  <exclude name="**/testing/**"/>
</source>

<!--
    We used to set this only for packages that had manual supersource. That
    worked everywhere that I know of except for one place: when running the GWT
    util.concurrent tests under Guava.

    The problem is that GWT responds poorly to two .gwt.xml files in the same
    Java package; see

<module>
<source path="">
  <!-- Hack to keep collect from hiding collect.testing supersource: -->
  <exclude name="**/testing/**"/>
</source>

<!--
    We used to set this only for packages that had manual supersource. That
    worked everywhere that I know of except for one place: when running the GWT
    util.concurrent tests under Guava.

    The problem is that GWT responds poorly to two .gwt.xml files in the same
    Java package; see

<module>
<source path="">
  <!-- Hack to keep collect from hiding collect.testing supersource: -->
  <exclude name="**/testing/**"/>
</source>

<!--
    We used to set this only for packages that had manual supersource. That
    worked everywhere that I know of except for one place: when running the GWT
    util.concurrent tests under Guava.

    The problem is that GWT responds poorly to two .gwt.xml files in the same
    Java package; see

<module>
<source path="">
  <!-- Hack to keep collect from hiding collect.testing supersource: -->
  <exclude name="**/testing/**"/>
</source>

<!--
    We used to set this only for packages that had manual supersource. That
    worked everywhere that I know of except for one place: when running the GWT
    util.concurrent tests under Guava.

    The problem is that GWT responds poorly to two .gwt.xml files in the same
    Java package; see

   *
   * @param q the blocking queue to be drained
   * @param buffer where to add the transferred elements
   * @param numElements the number of elements to be waited for
   * @param timeout how long to wait before giving up
   * @return the number of elements transferred
   * @throws InterruptedException if interrupted while waiting
   * @since 28.0 (but only since 33.4.0 in the Android flavor)
   */
  @CanIgnoreReturnValue

<module>
<source path="">
  <!-- Hack to keep collect from hiding collect.testing supersource: -->
  <exclude name="**/testing/**"/>
</source>

<!--
    We used to set this only for packages that had manual supersource. That
    worked everywhere that I know of except for one place: when running the GWT
    util.concurrent tests under Guava.

    The problem is that GWT responds poorly to two .gwt.xml files in the same
    Java package; see

<module>
<source path="">
  <!-- Hack to keep collect from hiding collect.testing supersource: -->
  <exclude name="**/testing/**"/>
</source>

<!--
    We used to set this only for packages that had manual supersource. That
    worked everywhere that I know of except for one place: when running the GWT
    util.concurrent tests under Guava.

    The problem is that GWT responds poorly to two .gwt.xml files in the same
    Java package; see

These issues are more complex and might be challenging for first-time contributors.

You can share your interest in fixing the issue by commenting on it.
If somebody shared their interest in the issue, please consider letting them work on it.
However, if there are no changes for more than a week, it's safe to assume that the issue is up for grabs.