and test another isolated pipeline from any branch. 

We'll explain everything via an example. Let's say you make some changes on your branch `myTestBranch`
(we highly recommend to name this branch without prefix and hyphen (`-`) because it's used to generate build type ID) and want to
test these changes without affecting `master`/`release` pipeline. Here are the instructions.

  ImmutableSet() {}

  public static <E> Collector<E, ?, ImmutableSet<E>> toImmutableSet() {
    return CollectCollectors.toImmutableSet();
  }

  // Casting to any type is safe because the set will never hold any elements.
  @SuppressWarnings({"unchecked"})
  public static <E> ImmutableSet<E> of() {
    return (ImmutableSet<E>) RegularImmutableSet.EMPTY;
  }

``` hl_lines="5"
.
├── app
│   ├── __init__.py
│   ├── main.py
│   └── test_main.py
```

Because this file is in the same package, you can use relative imports to import the object `app` from the `main` module (`main.py`):

{* ../../docs_src/app_testing/test_main.py hl[3] *}

    cipher suite. We accidentally specified a key size of 256, preventing that cipher suite from
    being selected for any TLS handshakes. We didn't notice because this cipher suite isn't
    supported on Android, Java, or Conscrypt.

    We removed this cipher suite and `TLS_AES_128_CCM_SHA256` from the restricted, modern, and

   * These are properties of the collection as a whole; SIZED and SUBSIZED are more properties of
   * the spliterator implementation.
   */
  // @IgnoreJRERequirement is not necessary because this compiles down to a constant.
  // (which is fortunate because Animal Sniffer doesn't look for @IgnoreJRERequirement on fields)
  static final int SPLITERATOR_CHARACTERISTICS =
      Spliterator.IMMUTABLE | Spliterator.NONNULL | Spliterator.ORDERED;

4.  Code contributions require signing a Google CLA.

API changes
-----------

We make changes to Guava's public [APIs][], including adding new APIs, very
carefully. Because of this, if you're interested in seeing a new feature in
Guava, the best approach is to create an [issue][] (or comment on an existing
issue if there is one) requesting the feature and describing specific use cases
for it.

  //   similar purposes.
  // * We want to behave reasonably for timeouts of 0
  // * We are more responsive to completion than timeouts. This is because parkNanos depends on
  //   system scheduling and as such we could either miss our deadline, or unpark() could be delayed
  //   so that it looks like we timed out even though we didn't. For comparison FutureTask respects

  @MapFeature.Require(SUPPORTS_REMOVE)
  /*
   * ListMultimap.asMap essentially returns a Map<K, List<V>>; we just can't declare it that way.
   * Thus, calls like asMap().values().remove(someList) are safe because they are comparing a list
   * to a collection of other lists.
   */
  @SuppressWarnings("CollectionUndefinedEquality")
  public void testValuesRemove() {

    map = MutableClassToInstanceMap.create();
  }

  public void testConstraint() {
    /*
     * We'll give ourselves a pass on testing all the possible ways of breaking the constraint,
     * because we know that newClassMap() is implemented using ConstrainedMap which is itself
     * well-tested. A purist would object to this, but what can I say, we're dirty cheaters.
     */
    map.put(Integer.class, new Integer(5));

  @MapFeature.Require(SUPPORTS_REMOVE)
  /*
   * ListMultimap.asMap essentially returns a Map<K, List<V>>; we just can't declare it that way.
   * Thus, calls like asMap().values().remove(someList) are safe because they are comparing a list
   * to a collection of other lists.
   */
  @SuppressWarnings("CollectionUndefinedEquality")
  public void testValuesRemove() {