## Version 4.6.0

_2020-04-28_

 *  Fix: Follow HTTP 307 and 308 redirects on methods other than GET and POST. We're reluctant to
    change OkHttp's behavior in handling common HTTP status codes, but this fix is overdue! The new
    behavior is now consistent with [RFC 7231][rfc_7231_647], which is newer than OkHttp itself.
    If you want this update with the old behavior use [this interceptor][legacy_interceptor].

        return fessConfig.isCrawlerDocumentDuplicateTermRemoved();
    }

    /**
     * Gets the array of space character codes from configuration.
     *
     * @return array of character codes to be treated as spaces
     */
    protected int[] getSpaceChars() {
        final FessConfig fessConfig = ComponentUtil.getFessConfig();

        }
        super.tearDown();
    }

    // Test basic initialization
    public void test_hookInitialization() {
        assertNotNull(apiFailureHook);
    }

    // Test API result status codes
    public void test_apiResultStatusCodes() {
        // Test OK status
        ApiResult okResult = new ApiResult.ApiResponse().status(Status.OK).result();
        assertNotNull(okResult);

        assertTrue(result1.startsWith("FessUserTimeZoneProcessProvider:{"));
        assertTrue(result2.startsWith("FessUserTimeZoneProcessProvider:{"));

        // But different hash codes
        assertFalse(result1.equals(result2));
    }

    // Test static field initialization
    public void test_centralTimeZone_initialization() {
        // Verify that centralTimeZone is properly initialized

     * log n) on average.
     *
     * <p>The online hash flooding detecting in RegularSetBuilderImpl.add can detect e.g. many
     * exactly matching hash codes, which would cause construction to take O(n^2), but can't detect
     * e.g. hash codes adversarially designed to go into ascending table locations, which keeps
     * construction O(n) (as desired) but then can have O(n) queries later.
     *

 *   <li>comparing each pair of objects within the same equality group returns true
 *   <li>comparing each pair of objects from different equality groups returns false
 *   <li>the hash codes of any two equal objects are equal
 * </ul>
 *
 * <p>When a test fails, the error message labels the objects involved in the failed comparison as
 * follows:
 *
 * <ul>

 *   <li>comparing each pair of objects within the same equality group returns true
 *   <li>comparing each pair of objects from different equality groups returns false
 *   <li>the hash codes of any two equal objects are equal
 * </ul>
 *
 * <p>When a test fails, the error message labels the objects involved in the failed comparison as
 * follows:
 *
 * <ul>

    // Make sure that hash codes are not computed per-instance.
    assertEqualHashCode(Predicates.not(p1), Predicates.not(p1));

    assertEqualHashCode(Predicates.and(p1, p2), Predicates.and(p1, p2));

    assertEqualHashCode(Predicates.or(p1, p2), Predicates.or(p1, p2));

    // While not a contractual requirement, we'd like the hash codes for ands
    // & ors of the same predicates to not collide.

        assertNotNull(exception.getStackTrace());
        assertTrue(exception.getStackTrace().length > 0);
    }

    public void test_differentMessageCodes() {
        // Setup - test with different message codes
        final String message = "Test message";
        final VaMessenger<FessMessages> loginErrorCode = messages -> messages.addErrorsSsoLoginError(UserMessages.GLOBAL_PROPERTY_KEY);

        entry = entry.getNextInKeyBucket()) {
      Object candidateKey = entry.getKey();

      /*
       * Assume that equals uses the == optimization when appropriate, and that
       * it would check hash codes as an optimization when appropriate. If we
       * did these things, it would just make things worse for the most
       * performance-conscious users.
       */
      if (key.equals(candidateKey)) {